Goopster24 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Situation in one of my leagues involving Forsett. Trade was proposed before Lynch was traded, trade was accepted after Lynch was traded. Should the trade be nixed by the commissioner? Welcome all thoughts. Exhibit A - ESPN Fantasy Receive Justin Forsett, Sea RB from Shiffman to Bench Receive Aaron Hernandez, NE TE from Shiffman to Bench Send Jermaine Gresham, Cin TE from TE to Shiffman Send Ronnie Brown, Mia RB from Bench to Shiffman Proposed by Grenade Extraction (Jonathan Ede), Oct 5, 2:05 PM ET Accepted by Team Shiffman, Oct 5, 2:54 PM ET Move will process at approximately Oct 7, 2:54 PM ET, or when all involved players unlock. Exhibit B - Rotoworld News Seahawks acquired RB Marshawn Lynch from the Bills in exchange for a 2011 fourth-round pick and a conditional 2012 draft pick. The 2012 pick is a sixth-rounder that can escalate to a fifth based on Lynch's production. It's not an ideal landing spot for Lynch owners praying for a Green Bay trade, but it beats staying in Buffalo. The Seahawks have been trying to deal for Lynch since early in the summer, and he should slot right into the feature back role as a low-end RB2 with Justin Forsett now the change-of-pace back. Fred Jackson and C.J. Spiller should gain flex status now that there are only two mouths to feed in Buffalo. Julius Jones should be released shortly. Oct. 5 - 2:27 pm et Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Why wouldnt this be fair? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 assuming the proposer was the one with forsett originally, I think the determining factor should be whether he still wants the trade to go through or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted October 6, 2010 Author Share Posted October 6, 2010 Why wouldnt this be fair? assuming the proposer was the one with forsett originally, I think the determining factor should be whether he still wants the trade to go through or not. Apologize for not being clear. The person who proposed the trade was trading for Forsett, thinking Lynch was obviously not there. That changed in the short time the trade was reviewed, the person giving up Forsett clicked accept, obviously knowing that Forsett was now not the feature back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokerboss Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 found myself in the same situation, but the deal was proposed and accepted via personal message, not even at league site, but i had said it was a deal, so its a deal. bad form to back out of a deal you agreed to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Not everyone has internet access 24-7 I feel that a trade proposed and accepted should be also agreed upon via message board post after the deal on the online service. This assures that both parties agree on the trade while having internet access. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delicious_bass Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Propose trades at your own risk, IMO. Once you throw it out there, its fair game until recinded or declined. No reason for the comissh to get involved here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Apologize for not being clear. The person who proposed the trade was trading for Forsett, thinking Lynch was obviously not there. That changed in the short time the trade was reviewed, the person giving up Forsett clicked accept, obviously knowing that Forsett was now not the feature back. my bad, that's what I meant, the person getting forsett. if they want the trade to go through, it should. if they don't want it to go through, it shouldn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) Nothing to see here IMO. It is the owners responsibility to do their own due diligence on the players in a deal. If a commish ever stepped in on a deal like this, I would probably have to throw gas on him and light him on fire. ETA - I see the issue now. I still agree with most in that once a trade is offered, its fair game until it is revoked. Edited October 6, 2010 by peepinmofo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boilerduff Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) Bad luck and Bad timing. If the proposer was paying attention he could have pulled the deal. This is no different than if they make the trade and on the first play of the next game Forsett breaks an arm, a leg and a tooth and is out for the season. Could the accpetor not been a (censored) weenie and not accepted the deal, yes, but that karma train will come back to flatten him. Nothing says that lynch doesnt get broken on the first play, and forsett goes back to his old role. The trade was offered, and accepted. It's the rub of the green in my opinion. As a commish you sit on your hands, IMO. Edited October 6, 2010 by Boilerduff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL Fan Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Propose trades at your own risk, IMO. Once you throw it out there, its fair game until recinded or declined. No reason for the comissh to get involved here If this happened in the league I'm commish in, I would rescind the trade only if both teams agreed to it because of the dramatic change in players' values. If the teams did not agree, I would let it stand with a reminder that I always think it's a good idea to agree on any trade with another team via email, phone, or message board and work out all the details. Then arrange a time both can be online and have one propose the trade and one accept it. That means that right up until the button is pressed, either team can bail if something happens. Never propose a trade cold and leave it hanging out there indefinitely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 I would ask the owner who accepted the deal, point blank in the public forum of your league. What motivated you to accept the deal now , instead of earlier when it was offered. I think as commish, if your league allows you to mediate a problem, you have the ability to institute a little fairness and integrity to the league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 For me, I usually talk to people about deals before just blindly throwing deals out there. I know not everyone does that, but still... If you dont want to run the risk of something like this, then talk about deals before offering them. Also, What would have happened had they made the deal the day before the trade? Would it be fair to go back on the deal they had agreed on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delicious_bass Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 If this happened in the league I'm commish in, I would rescind the trade only if both teams agreed to it because of the dramatic change in players' values. If the teams did not agree, I would let it stand with a reminder that I always think it's a good idea to agree on any trade with another team via email, phone, or message board and work out all the details. Then arrange a time both can be online and have one propose the trade and one accept it. That means that right up until the button is pressed, either team can bail if something happens. Never propose a trade cold and leave it hanging out there indefinitely. Good call. If/when I propose trades, I have almost always worked out the details before making the official offer via the league site. So its usually not a matter of if they will accept at that point just when. In the event they (for whatever reason) dont accept/reject in a timely manner, I pull the offer back so that I dont get stuck with any surprises. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 this is one of the reasons for having commissioner review, or message board confirmation, or some other safeguard in place to ensure that the deal, UPON ACCEPTANCE, is one both parties agree to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL Fan Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 For me, I usually talk to people about deals before just blindly throwing deals out there. I know not everyone does that, but still... If you dont want to run the risk of something like this, then talk about deals before offering them. Also, What would have happened had they made the deal the day before the trade? Would it be fair to go back on the deal they had agreed on? Nope, that would clearly be a done deal ande just bad luck. This was very different. A proposal hanging out there and an owner who accepted it only after the trade. Completely different deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 This is the one time I agree on trade review/veto/takeback/commish override lameness. No one wants to be a slave to FF and watch 24/7. In a situation where owners are operating with POTENTIAL different levels of knowledge it creates a huge competitive imbalance and no one wants this. Ask yourself this - "if the each owner had 24/7 internet access and spent all day hammering F5 on his favorite fantasy page, would this trade still go down?" If the answer is no, it's an easy reversal. Give both guys a shot to compete fairly and not based on lucky timing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Nope, that would clearly be a done deal ande just bad luck. This was very different. A proposal hanging out there and an owner who accepted it only after the trade. Completely different deal. Sounds to me like it was just bad luck anyway... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted October 6, 2010 Author Share Posted October 6, 2010 First off, the guy who accepted the trade has come out and said basically, "sucks for you, you should have pulled the trade." I think that is dick of him. Second, this has split the league, among those who think it should be revoked and those who don't. The commissioner has sat on his hands, and frankly, that's what bothers me. I am a commissioner of a different league so I know how politics and stuff like that work. But I usually state my opinion and then put it to league vote. All trades in this league with this trade are up for league veto. But the commissioner has basically sat afar while people argue and complain and call each other out. I think that's wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted October 6, 2010 Author Share Posted October 6, 2010 I'm surprised by the responses here. 22 minutes after the trade was proposed, the value of a player involved in the deal changed DRAMATICALLY. That isn't fair and like someone has stated here, not everyone is in front of a computer 24/7 to pull the trade. If CJ was involved in a trade proposal and was involved in a car crash 15 minutes after it was proposed and it was deemed he'd be out for the season, wouldn't that trade offer be unfair? Value has changed dramatically, shortly after the trade was proposed, and the person who accepted it used that to their advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL Fan Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 what about the fact that Hernandez's value went up? What if Lynch gets arrested before he even arrives in SEA? Do you re-reverse the trade? We don't have any idea what a totally different trade means for the value of Hernandez. Lynch's value clearly goes way up. Hernandez? Maybe. Not a factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL Fan Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 what about the fact that Hernandez's value went up? What if Lynch gets arrested before he even arrives in SEA? Do you re-reverse the trade? Forgot your second point. What you're missing is the difference between a completed trade and a trade proposal. Anything that happens after a trade is completed is too bad, so sad. This change happened before the trade was accepted. Hugh difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 I'm surprised by the responses here. 22 minutes after the trade was proposed, the value of a player involved in the deal changed DRAMATICALLY. That isn't fair and like someone has stated here, not everyone is in front of a computer 24/7 to pull the trade. If CJ was involved in a trade proposal and was involved in a car crash 15 minutes after it was proposed and it was deemed he'd be out for the season, wouldn't that trade offer be unfair? Value has changed dramatically, shortly after the trade was proposed, and the person who accepted it used that to their advantage. What was the date and time (Est) , that the trade was proposed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budlitebrad Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Totally fair. It's not the commish's job to step in and fix an owner's mistake. Next time agree to the trade through email and then process it on the league site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goopster24 Posted October 6, 2010 Author Share Posted October 6, 2010 What was the date and time (Est) , that the trade was proposed? Proposed by Grenade Extraction (Jonathan Ede), Oct 5, 2:05 PM ET Accepted by Team Shiffman, Oct 5, 2:54 PM ET 22 minutes after the trade was proposed, Lynch was traded according to Rotoworld. And the Aaron Hernandez concept is ridiculous IMO. That is a different position. Forsett and Lynch play THE SAME POSITION, resulting in competition, resulting in direct value change. Give me a break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.