Big Dogs Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Need advice from the Huddler masses. I've always been of the opinion that unless there is a specific example of collusion, all trades should be allowed to stand, even if they seem to be a 1 sided trade. We have a situation in one of my leagues where I am the commissioner that one team who is fighting to make the playoffs & win his division (Team A) made a trade to a team that has no chance of making the post season, and has somewhat given up on her team. [Team-B] Team A traded: Adrian Peterson, Ben Roethlisburger, and Torrey Smith for Team B gives up: Tom Brady, Steve Smith (Car), and Colt's Def. We have a standard performance scoring league. We have some basic trade rules that do not allow 1 week trades and all trades must be for the same number of players. Team B has been devestated at RB, and the two players they traded were the only two real point scorers on their entire team. Also, I have a personal stake in this because if Team A wins, he will get the #3 seed in our playoff structure, and I've already locked up the #2 seed, and if he wins his first game, I will have to play Team A (which I'm not looking forward to). I personally believe this is a one sided trade, but based on the rules we have in place, and to be completely fair and unbias, I approved the trade, but now most of the teams in the league (especially the ones fighting for playoff spots and the ones who will make the playoffs are screaming about how unfair this trade is and how I should reverse it..... Need advice and thoughts from the Huddler masses!!! Next year, I'm planning on putting in some additional rules to try and put limits around potential collusion or completely lopsided trades, and would like to understand other rules other leagues have in place to avoid stuff like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twiley Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) Looks a little lopsided to me but only because Player B has no shot at the playoffs and this is the exact reason why I don't allow trades past week 10 in a few of my leagues. ETA: On paper, can't really argue for an unfair trade. Given the circumstances - this trade is pointless to player B and offers no value, particularly if your playoffs start next week like most leagues. Edited December 1, 2011 by twiley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 I believe teams who have been eliminated from playoff contention should not be allowed to trade with anyone. At least in redraft leagues. Makes things really tidy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 The most common way to stop a lot of problem trades of this nature is to have a rule about no trades after the start of week 10 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) Nothing wrong with that trade. People need to get a grip and let other's manage their own teams. ETA: Agree with the sentiment of a trading deadline to eliminate the need for these discussions. Edited December 1, 2011 by Hugh 0ne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 I wouldn't allow trades after week 10 or if teams are out of playoff contention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecondString Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 I think you did the right thing approving the trade...on the surface, not too uneven. Back up the trade deadline, that helps to cut way down on these arguements every year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Nothing wrong with that trade. People need to get a grip and let other's manage their own teams. ETA: Agree with the sentiment of a trading deadline to eliminate the need for these discussions. I think you have to let it go because there's no proof of collusion, but I wouldn't go that far. You've got an injured back, a decent FF QB, and a guy who is completely hit and miss for a QB on fire who is facing a cupcake schedule down the stretch, one of the top WRs of the season, and, well, it doesn't really matter at that point. This is not a matter of "there's nothing wrong with this trade". This is a matter of, too bad we don't have something in place to prevent teams who are completely out of it to make trades with teams who aren't so, oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) I think you have to let it go because there's no proof of collusion, but I wouldn't go that far. You've got an injured back, a decent FF QB, and a guy who is completely hit and miss for a QB on fire who is facing a cupcake schedule down the stretch, one of the top WRs of the season, and, well, it doesn't really matter at that point. Bullcrapola: Let's keep it real simple. Combined YTD fantasy points for Brady, S. Smith (CAR) and Colts D is 543, total YTD fantasy points for Roeth, AP and T. Smith is 520. Yeah, Peterson is questionable this week, but even if he misses another week, he's a top 5 fantasy back. It's a fair trade, plain and simple. Edited December 1, 2011 by Hugh 0ne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) Bullcrapola: Let's keep it real simple. Combined YTD fantasy points for Brady, S. Smith (CAR) and Colts D is 543, total YTD fantasy points for Roeth, AP and T. Smith is 520. Yeah, Peterson is questionable this week, but even if he misses another week, he's a top 5 fantasy back. It's a fair trade, plain and simple. That total points breakdown is only close because the Colts D is useless. Suffice to say that the dude who is getting them has a D better than that. So, the T Smith for Colts D is what makes the trade seem equal. So, team A gives up a wildly inconsistent WR for basically nothing to make the trade seem fair. And, I guess, if team B was actually still playing for something and was getting 2 very marginal starters and a guy who should be fine when he comes back from injury, it might be worth giving up two bonafide studs, but I still thing it's a BS trade. Studs are studs and one team is giving up an injured stud for two that aren't. The rest is window dressing. In one of my leagues, there are FAs who are ranked way closer to Big Ben than he is to Brady. Same with T Smith. There are guys who have been cycling on and off of rosters all season long who have put up nearly as many (or more) points as T Smith (who, himself, has also cycled on and off of rosters). So, that absolutely marginalizes their value. The downgrade from S Smith to T Smith is 73 pts in one of my leagues. The downgrade from T Smith to the best available FA is 9. Again, nothing you could veto, but thinking a trade sucks and actually telling people what they can and can't do with their roster are different things. Edited December 1, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 this is one of those that is absolutely a fair and reasonable trade if it happens at, say, week7, or if it happens between two teams still in playoff contention. or if it was a keeper league. but in these circumstances it seems a little bush. since you don't have a rule against it, you have to let it slide. next year I would institute a trading deadline, or a rule that teams eliminated from playoff contention cannot execute trades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinkris Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 This goes back to my point I made in a previous thread kid of like this. When teams are mathematically out of the playoffs, they should not be allowed to trade in a redraft league. Many posters had a problem with what I said, because they would themselves like to play spoiler, but this isn't the case for many people playing fantasy football. It makes things tidy if there is a rule saying you are not allowed to trade with teams out of the playoff hunt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dogs Posted December 1, 2011 Author Share Posted December 1, 2011 Thanks for the feedback everyone! I agree with many of the statements and we've been discussing putting other trading rules in place, but just never pulled the trigger. Those rules will be in place for next year. And to answer one of the questions........ This is a redraft league, and Team B threw in the Colt's D simply because we must have an even number of players involved in a trade. We don't allow 1 for 3 or 2 for 3 type trades which is what this trade was. What really sucks about not having a rule in place is that stuff like this usually results in some teams leaving the league. We do have a rule in the league that if 2/3'rds of the league can overturn the decision or action of a commissioner. There are a few teams trying to get votes now, so it looks as though the only way this trade will be overturned is if that happens. Thanks for the feedback and the new rules suggestions!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 When teams are mathematically out of the playoffs, they should not be allowed to trade in a redraft league. Many posters had a problem with what I said, because they would themselves like to play spoiler, but this isn't the case for many people playing fantasy football. I was probably one of the ones who disagreed, because if I'm going to pay my money, then particularly in a league against friends, I'm going to do everything in my power to play spoiler against them. An eliminated team just played spoiler to me last week and probably knocked me out of the playoffs, and is ecstatic about it. Of course a trade between a competitor and eliminated team should face more scrutiny. In this case I would have had absolutely no problem with any RB-needy making that trade to land Peterson, IF was healthy. The problem is that he's not healthy right now, and that makes this trade really stinky, when one of the main pieces is one he can't use (and a piece that you stated he needs). Do you even play in week 14? If not, he's getting literally nothing out of Peterson, and only 1 week if you do play 14 and he's good to go then... I also agree that you should have a trade deadline around week 10 to help prevent things like this, while most are still in contention.... But I'm strongly against eliminated teams not getting the same opportunities to make trades that improve their teams like everyone else. They just have to face more scrutiny in stating how they feel it helps more than hurts them, but if you take away all abilities from them to do what they want with the team they paid for, then you're only going to have a situation like the other thread today about people giving up mid-season... Kudos for you as commish to not use your "personal stake" in the trade to turn it down, but I don't think this one passes the smell test, IMHO.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinkris Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 I was probably one of the ones who disagreed, because if I'm going to pay my money, then particularly in a league against friends, I'm going to do everything in my power to play spoiler against them. An eliminated team just played spoiler to me last week and probably knocked me out of the playoffs, and is ecstatic about it. Of course a trade between a competitor and eliminated team should face more scrutiny. In this case I would have had absolutely no problem with any RB-needy making that trade to land Peterson, IF was healthy. The problem is that he's not healthy right now, and that makes this trade really stinky, when one of the main pieces is one he can't use (and a piece that you stated he needs). Do you even play in week 14? If not, he's getting literally nothing out of Peterson, and only 1 week if you do play 14 and he's good to go then... I also agree that you should have a trade deadline around week 10 to help prevent things like this, while most are still in contention.... But I'm strongly against eliminated teams not getting the same opportunities to make trades that improve their teams like everyone else. They just have to face more scrutiny in stating how they feel it helps more than hurts them, but if you take away all abilities from them to do what they want with the team they paid for, then you're only going to have a situation like the other thread today about people giving up mid-season... Kudos for you as commish to not use your "personal stake" in the trade to turn it down, but I don't think this one passes the smell test, IMHO.. Yeah I am sure you were. And I agree, you should be able to do things still as I would also love to play spoiler. There are just too many people who give up though, and even if they aren't colluding, just don't care anymore so will do trades if offered too them. I also agree that the best way is to set an early trade deadline, where no one is Mathematically eliminated so that it won't create controversy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonny2fngrs Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Yeah this trade seems to be bunk. Team B is trading for AP who can only possibly be helpful this final week for them and his status is up in the air. As a commish, I am with you on not letting the trade go through, but I can guarantee in our league there would be an outcry and put up for vote and easily overturned. Lets hope justice prevails in your league and the league votes to overturn it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Earlier trade deadline definitely, I think like most we use week 10. As far as NOT allowing teams to trade once eliminated from playoff contention, even if its a redraft league that isn't fair unless you can't (or won't) move up the trade deadline, or have some way to overturn a very lopsided trade (not saying this one is). 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.