Snootch Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I'm not one to really ever veto a trade. Its only happened once in all my years of Fantasy Football, but a trade in one of my leagues just got accepted that is extremely one sided. The last place team in our league is trading away Mike Wallace to a team contending for the playoffs for Sidney Rice, Malcolm Floyd, and Kevin Faulk. This just screams collusion to me, and I feel like it has to be vetoed. What are all your guys thoughts on the matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 If you must, ask the owner giving up Wallace how the trade makes his team better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 If you must, ask the owner giving up Wallace how the trade makes his team better. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) If you must, ask the owner giving up Wallace how the trade makes his team better. Yup. Most of these threads aren't even close to collusion/vetoable, but Last Place + Stud for Bench Trash = Fishy... He needs to be able to justify why this was more than just dumping his player to help out a competing team (which I find dumping on the same line as collusion, because it's equally damaging and it gives me mroe reason to assume than doubt that you could both be working together and splitting winnings). Mind you, if he can give a reasonable explanation, it doesn't have to be one you agree with... I'm a firm beleiver in the right for people to be stupid with their own teams, but they at least have to have a good legitimate reason in their eyes to be making the trade, and not just apathy or obviously collusion. Edited November 10, 2011 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croe Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) I don't know if its collusion. 3 for 1 alone says something. SIdney Rice doesn't have a bad matchup for the rest of the season while Wallace will be facing both CLE and CIN who are two of the best against the pass this year. Cincy has only given up 4 TDs to WRs this year and all Crabtree, Stevie Johnson, Mike Thomas, Reggie Wayne, Garcon, and Nate Washington have been held to under 60 yards. I know none of them are Wallace but now Wallace has Brown stealing a lot of targets. Cleavland has been even better against the pass giving up just 3 TDs and keeping in check just about the same list of WRs but add AJ Green DHB to that list and they kept all of them to under 87 yards. Plus Wallace has a bye week 11 which will definitely not help his team. KC has been no slouch against WRs either keeping Calvin Johnson to 29 yards and VJax to 49. Floyd sees DEN who he already went 100 and a TD against, BUF who have given up a good amount of yards to #2 WRs including 139 to JAson Avant and 146 and a TD to Denarius Moore. Kevin Faulk is an outlier there. But it would be interesting to know if he has Law Firm on his team. Without knowing a little more details such as their entire lineups and whether or not the team giving Wallace has a shot at making a late season run for the last playoff spot. Include these in order for us to make a more educated evaluation of the situation. Edited November 10, 2011 by Croe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 There's a reason he is in last place. Maybe he just doesn't know how much better Wallace is than the collection of other players. Both Rice and Floyd seem to be kind of heating up. Not sure why Faulk is involved in anything whatsoever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Do Work Son Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 If you must, ask the owner giving up Wallace how the trade makes his team better. +1 Faulk just returned from pup and had a pretty decent sized role in his debut. So he could help the other team at rb if he's in need(esp PPR) K Faulk: 1 GP, 6 Attempts- 32 yds, 5 Recpetions, 20 yds. S Rice: 6 GP, 27 Receptions, 435 yds, 1 td. Averages 4.5 Catches per game/ 72.5 YPG. M Floyd: 7 GP, 19 Receptions, 401 yds, 1 td. Averages 2.7 CPG/ 57 YPG. Combine the 2 MalcNey FloRice 13 GP, 46 Receptions/836 yds, 2 tds. 3.5 CPG/ 64 YPG. vs M Wallace: 9 GP, 47 Receptions, 868 yds, 6 td. Averages 5.2 CPG/ 96.4 YPG The 2 combined come close but still dont beat out 1 Mike Wallace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snootch Posted November 10, 2011 Author Share Posted November 10, 2011 I asked the guy how the trade legitimately makes his team better, we'll see what he says. His other RB/WR are: RBs Chris Johnson Tomlinson Jonathan Stewart McCluster Ryan Torain WRs Mike Williams Plaxico Burress Hines Ward (Mike Wallace) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinkris Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 This is the problem with a redraft league. There is sure too be teams who are eliminated from making the playoffs at some point and if the trade deadline is after, in all fairness it makes no sense for that team to trade. I know many leagues have rules in place like highest week scorer or most points etc so people don't tank. If you don't however, problems like this can arise. Really why would the last place team want to trade? If they have no hope of making the playoffs, and there isn't any bonuses there isn't much need to trade. I am sure there are some people who would always want to have the best team than can no matter what to be other people for bragging rights, but there will always be people suspecting a team trading who is out of the playoffs. I know it sucks that they can't really trade, and you can't trade with them, but I just can't see why a team out of the playoffs, where only the regulars season winner/playoff winners are paid, would really need to trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I know it sucks that they can't really trade, and you can't trade with them, but I just can't see why a team out of the playoffs, where only the regulars season winner/playoff winners are paid, would really need to trade. Well, there's a pretty simple answer to that... To have some fun and maybe play spoiler for some folks, since you're not going to win the league... I've heard this said that teams out of it shouldn't even be able to trade, but what if you can land players of similar value you'd rather root for, or if you have some big matchups you want to win for bragging rights? I know that if it's a redraft and no future draft pick considerations, then I absolutely don't want to be "that guy" at the bottom of the totem pole and will do everything in my power to win every game I can and play spoiler. But yes, when a team out of it is trading with one in contention, then it does deserve looking at it harder, particularly when you've got a trade for a stud for bench fodder... There's no real way to draw that line of what trades are legitimate and which one's dumping, but I think it's like this, and know if you see it, and ask for an explanation if it offers him no real upgrade to balance the downgrade. 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.