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 This theme may be out of date.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.]]

Fantasy trading between players - prevent trading back and forth


djk80
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey guys quick question in your leagues how do you prevent players from trading back and forth for each other.

 

Currently we have trades where there is a 3 day waiting period and the other players have to vote if they want to decline it.

 

We may be changing it so that trades are instant but it will just be up to the commissioner and will be instant. It would be up to me, I know if its a fair trade or not but how do you make it so players dont trade back and forth from each other?

 

Also are your trades instant or do you prefer to keep the 3 day waiting period or so.

 

Last season we just ran into some problems where there was a 3 day waiting period but one nfl player would have a game then the other one wouldnt so there was some odd things like that

 

Let me know what you think! Any help is appreciated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 on loaf and papajohn

 

 

Having it in your rules is the best, that way everybody knows and there's a clear cut path of enforcement. We don't have it in our rules, but then we've never seen it (and generally our owners are not DBs).

 

We have a long standing league (going on 20 years) with most of the same owners. Once two owners accept a trade through the league site, the only hold up is approval by the commissioner. I am one of the two co-comish, and I don't think we've ever NOT approved a trade. There is no league vote or anything like that (hate the idea of that). If we saw two owners "lending players" to each other by trading back and forth in a short period we'd stop it by not approving. We also have a $2 charge for any player added to your roster, which prevents some of that kind of siliness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys quick question in your leagues how do you prevent players from trading back and forth for each other.

 

Currently we have trades where there is a 3 day waiting period and the other players have to vote if they want to decline it.

 

We may be changing it so that trades are instant but it will just be up to the commissioner and will be instant. It would be up to me, I know if its a fair trade or not but how do you make it so players dont trade back and forth from each other?

 

Also are your trades instant or do you prefer to keep the 3 day waiting period or so.

 

Last season we just ran into some problems where there was a 3 day waiting period but one nfl player would have a game then the other one wouldnt so there was some odd things like that

 

Let me know what you think! Any help is appreciated

 

 

How do you know what is fair or not? What makes your opinion of player value any better than the owners making the trade?

 

 

As for preventing trade backs, most leagues I am in have language that makes it illegal to trade players back and forth. Either the player can;t be traded back to the same team within x number of weeks, or he can;t be traded back from the same team. I.E., I trade you McCoy in a deal, you can't deal him back to me for 4 weeks. Or I deal you McCoy, you can;t trade him back to me period, but if you had traded him to a third owner, I could trade for him through that other owner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only rule should be "no collusion".

Pretty much.

 

What happens if Team X trades Player A (a TE, for example) to Team Y for a draft pick.

 

The following week, both of Team X's remaining TEs get hurt (hey it could happen).

 

Y'all are saying that Team X can't attempt to regain his recently-traded player in this situation? If so, why not?

 

If it's collusion-based, then nix it and boot the owners. If you can't prove it, why can't they do it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cut out my leagues by-laws

 

5. TRADES:

 

A) All trades are free

B) Trades are proposed by players, but ultimately approved by Commish

C) The Commish has the right to VETO any trade

D) Players have the right to OBJECT to any trade

E) In the event of OBJECTION: owners will debate through 'message board', vote via 'homepage poll' between APPROVE,

DENY, or ABSTAIN

F) Majority vote by first kickoff, will rule, with one (1) chance of appeal.

G) Appeal will be handled similar to an objection, DIFFERENCE BEING a "2/3rds Majority" vote needed to overturn

i. "2/3rds Majority" being 7 owners or more

F) Trading back the same player to his original team of origin, cannot occur until 3 weeks has passed from trade date

G)All trades will need approval, by vote, AFTER week 9

H)Trade Deadline is the beginning of week 12

 

 

ii. Note: Bye weeks and injuries don't allow for a "weekly swap out" with another owner. PLAN ACCORDINGLY! You must

abide to all trading rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cut out my leagues by-laws

 

5. TRADES:

 

A) All trades are free

B) Trades are proposed by players, but ultimately approved by Commish

C) The Commish has the right to VETO any trade

D) Players have the right to OBJECT to any trade

E) In the event of OBJECTION: owners will debate through 'message board', vote via 'homepage poll' between APPROVE,

DENY, or ABSTAIN

F) Majority vote by first kickoff, will rule, with one (1) chance of appeal.

G) Appeal will be handled similar to an objection, DIFFERENCE BEING a "2/3rds Majority" vote needed to overturn

i. "2/3rds Majority" being 7 owners or more

F) Trading back the same player to his original team of origin, cannot occur until 3 weeks has passed from trade date

G)All trades will need approval, by vote, AFTER week 9

H)Trade Deadline is the beginning of week 12

 

 

ii. Note: Bye weeks and injuries don't allow for a "weekly swap out" with another owner. PLAN ACCORDINGLY! You must

abide to all trading rules.

 

B through G are ghey rules, excluding F

Edited by HowboutthemCowboys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is how we handle that situation

6.2 General

Trades made during the regular season occur between Weeks 1 through Week 8. All trades shall be automatically accepted.

6.5 Trading Shenanigans

Once a player on your team is traded to another team, he may not be traded back to you from the same team, or any other team, for a minimum time of 4 weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much.

 

What happens if Team X trades Player A (a TE, for example) to Team Y for a draft pick.

 

The following week, both of Team X's remaining TEs get hurt (hey it could happen).

 

Y'all are saying that Team X can't attempt to regain his recently-traded player in this situation? If so, why not?

 

If it's collusion-based, then nix it and boot the owners. If you can't prove it, why can't they do it?

 

What is going to stop owners from trading players to each other to cover a bye week and then trade back the next week?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've never had any rules to address this because people recognize that it's a shady thing to do. I agree with the "no DBs" in your league comment. I'd rather not have a rule so when someone does try this kind of garbage I at least then know what kind of owner I'm dealing with.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is going to stop owners from trading players to each other to cover a bye week and then trade back the next week?

 

 

The fact that this is a clear cut case of collusion and will get their azzes booted from the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is going to stop owners from trading players to each other to cover a bye week and then trade back the next week?

 

 

Did the owner(s) benefit in other regards? That is, say you need to cover a kicker's bye:

 

Team A trades:

Matt Bryant

Jimmy Graham

 

to Team B for:

Stephen Gostowski

Jason Witten

 

... and then a couple weeks later flip the kickers back. Obviously one team benefitted by getting Graham over Witten and the other avoids the bye issue. I'm not saying this trade would ever happen because anyone in their right mind would just pick up a FA keeker, but it explains a point.

 

Obviously if you just trade player A for player B and then the next week fliip them back as a favor, that's weak sauce.

 

The fact that this is a clear cut case of collusion and will get their azzes booted from the league.

 

 

Not sure I'd call it collusion, although it's pretty weak sauce.

 

But there are examples where putting a rule in like "players acquired in trade cannot be traded again for x-amount of weeks" is pretty stupid IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That scenario is walking a very fine line and borders on roster sharing, at least IMO.

 

 

I like to think that most of my owners are ethical, but sometimes ones definition of ethical can be very different.

 

 

I'll take an example from a league I used to be involved in. IIRC, it was a keeper league where we help 8 players of a 20 man roster. In the offseason, one of the owners basically gave up two of their better (not best) players for essentially the entire unkept roster of another team. Maybe 1 or two borderline keeper players there for him. When pressed on why he would do that deal, as it basically weakened his keeper options, he admitted that it was essentially an agreement they had made during an in season trade that made him stronger during the season, he would ship good players back during the offseason to make up for slightly underpaying during the season.

 

Now, these were two very close friends of mine, who were genuinely shocked at how upset I was. Once i explained my point of view of how they essentially shared the roster for the whole season and threw off the competitive balance of the league, they understood, but at the time, they genuinely did not see anything wrong with what they were doing. And no, there was no agreement to split the pot if he won, etc.

 

So, we put rules in place basically saying no future considerations and limiting the trade back of players to help prevent anything like it from happening in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That scenario is walking a very fine line and borders on roster sharing, at least IMO.

 

 

I like to think that most of my owners are ethical, but sometimes ones definition of ethical can be very different.

 

 

I'll take an example from a league I used to be involved in. IIRC, it was a keeper league where we help 8 players of a 20 man roster. In the offseason, one of the owners basically gave up two of their better (not best) players for essentially the entire unkept roster of another team. Maybe 1 or two borderline keeper players there for him. When pressed on why he would do that deal, as it basically weakened his keeper options, he admitted that it was essentially an agreement they had made during an in season trade that made him stronger during the season, he would ship good players back during the offseason to make up for slightly underpaying during the season.

 

Now, these were two very close friends of mine, who were genuinely shocked at how upset I was. Once i explained my point of view of how they essentially shared the roster for the whole season and threw off the competitive balance of the league, they understood, but at the time, they genuinely did not see anything wrong with what they were doing. And no, there was no agreement to split the pot if he won, etc.

 

So, we put rules in place basically saying no future considerations and limiting the trade back of players to help prevent anything like it from happening in the future.

 

 

Yeah, in that case, I'd peg that as collusion.

 

In the hypothetical case I detailed... and just in general.... if an owner ships another owner a player and part of the agreement is to ship that player back after a couple weeks and there is additional benefit involved, I just don't see how that's collusion.

 

If it's "hey I'll buy you a case of Schlitz if you trade me Andrew Luck just for Drew Brees' bye week", then that's another story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like Big Country's example, all trades must stand on their own. Any trade that is contingent upon future considerations is collusion by definition.

 

 

Why? Don't they do this in actual professional sports leagues? If we're trying to make "fantasy" sports as close to "reality" as possible, why not allow for future considerations?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? Don't they do this in actual professional sports leagues? If we're trying to make "fantasy" sports as close to "reality" as possible, why not allow for future considerations?

 

 

Please provide an example of this happening in an NFL trade. I have never heard of one team loaning out a player for a portion of the season. Trades can involve current and future draft picks and players in any combination, but I have certainly never heard of a trade where one of the teams agrees to send a player back to the other team after a set period of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't happen so much now that we're older, but I've played in more than one leg where an owner and a buddy agree to trade a backup TE for a backup QB to cover byes for a week or two, with a promise to trade back after the byes. I'm not saying it is common, but there should be a rule in place where it can't happen. If you happen to have the one incidence where it is a legitimate tradeback for some other reason, I guess the rule could potentially hurt you. I don't see the scenario really ever happening, but at worst, you could still do the trade a few weeks later after the waiting period has ended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? Don't they do this in actual professional sports leagues? If we're trying to make "fantasy" sports as close to "reality" as possible, why not allow for future considerations?

 

 

Cmon man, you've done this long enough to know that "realistic" is only one factor to consider in how you run your leagues. In fact, those who try too hard to make their league "realistic" end up having a less sound league because of it... The reason why of course is that FF is not the same game as NFL football, it's only loosely based on it.

 

In this case, NFL teams don't have to worry about covering their bye weeks. They don't play them, we do. So fantasy owners have a different prerogative than NFL teams do. We have to manage bye weeks, and teams can decide to do this in a less than honest way by sharing players when they both need them. That's collusion as per the FF definition. This isn't the NFL.

 

Plus like BA said above, I don't even think NFL teams can get away with an agreed "trade-backsies" when the other team needs them. If you were to make it more like the NFL, it would be something like "I trade you player X for a second round pick that becomes your first if he scores Y points" or something incentive-laden like that.... Trade-backsies isn't even realistic. You know better than that.

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