Chloroform Rx Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 I hate posting about collusion in this forum, so I do apologize, but a trade went down in a league that has some of us prepared to walk away. This is the longest running and highest paying/cost league I've been in so it's a really unfortunate situation. Team 1: First place & Commissioner. Receives: Calvin Johnson Team 2: Last place (out of playoffs) & buddies with Team 1. Receives: Shane Vereen, Steve Smith Sr. On the surface it doesn't seem terribly bad, especially with how Smith started the season and Calvin has been injured. But the more digging that get's done the more dirt we find. Foremost, their last 3 games they rank 22nd and 24th, respectively. The opposite of sell high. 1. There is no veto system. There hasn't been all year so it's not like he disabled it, but the idea was that he (commissioner) would decide whether a vote to veto would be in order. In this case, he is involved in the trade. On a side note we did not agree to remove the veto system. 2. Steve Smith Sr. was on fire early on but has cooled off. He's scored less than 10 in 3 of the last 4 weeks. One does not simply sell low on a player like this for Calvin. 2. Vereen is decent at best, but it's funny it happens now that he is playing second fiddle to Gray now. 4. Then other teams in the league come out with what they offered for Calvin in days/weeks prior. Including Dez Bryant & Roddy White, Lamar Miller/Roddy/Crabtree, Andre Johnson/Chris Ivory/Mike Wallace. But he accepts Vereen and Smith Sr from his friend in first place. Thoughts? We are all pretty upset and have lashed out, created our own veto poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kook0725 Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) That's unfortunate. They are probably planning to split the winnings in some way. In one of my leagues, Last place was giving a borderline playoff guy (commissioner) Demarius Thomas for Sanu. Good thing is that one was quickly vetoed. Edited October 30, 2014 by kook0725 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorttynaz Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 I think it's a fair trade - is there collusion between the two teams? Who knows.. Does Team 1 get better by getting Megatron - sure depending on who else he has at RB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 this makes me sad. team 2 gets the better end of this deal. CJ has a major issue with the ankle. He'll be back but won't be 100% and I doubt he's a dominate receiver like team 1 is expecting. If anything I think team 1 is getting the short end. As a CJ owner in a redraft. i would take the deal easily. I don't think he can be counted on the rest of the year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chloroform Rx Posted October 30, 2014 Author Share Posted October 30, 2014 Hmmm. Interesting feedback. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn5033 Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Vereen is not playing 2nd fiddle to Gray. Its just usual Belicheck crap. I wouldn't be surprised if Vereen gets 75% of the RB touches this week. I don't think this trade is that bad either. I wouldn't do it myself but it sounds like you and the rest of you league mates are just mad that the 1st place team landed Megatron. Maybe the reason he traded with his buddy is because the guy is in last place and he doesn't have to worry about the trade hurting him at all Edited October 30, 2014 by Finn5033 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Team #2's already out of the playoffs? If this is a straight redraft (with no incentives like weekly skins, etc.) you need to establish a rule whereby once you're eliminated from the playoffs you can no longer make trades. Done and done. The trade is fair, but given the circumstances you have to question the motivations at hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn5033 Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Team #2's already out of the playoffs? If this is a straight redraft (with no incentives like weekly skins, etc.) you need to establish a rule whereby once you're eliminated from the playoffs you can no longer make trades. Done and done. The trade is fair, but given the circumstances you have to question the motivations at hand. I agree you have to have incentive for guys to stay interested all season. In my league we have 2 divisions, the guys who finish last in their division have to supply beer and food for next years draft which is quite spendy. Plus all the guys who miss the playoffs play for the toilet boil. Winner of that gets their entry fee back. It works really well to keep guys motivated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) Agree with Darin that dead teams in leagues with no keepers or dynasty should not be trading, but only once they are mathematically eliminated. There is nothing wrong with that trade. Who is Team 2 starting in their flex every week? Sometimes you have to sell a high value asset like Megatron because your RB2, WR3, and FLEX suck balls. Vereen's (perceived) value is way up with Ridley out. Steve Smith is still getting his targets. I definitely would not call this deal crazy. It sounds like you guys all know each other. Do you really think that the commish would collude, or is it more likely that he's just ripping off the other dude? There was a trade halfway through last season in my most competitive league where we are all long time friends. The commish got McCoy and Brady for TRich and Cam. The trade totally swung the league and the commish won the title on the back of that trade. I was super freaking pissed at the dumbass who handed him McCoy, but I never once thought for a second that they were in cahoots. I have known the commish for many years and I just know that is not even a possibility. A lot of us give the guy who gave away McCoy for a handful of magic beans a hard time every time we all get together as it helps to discourage stupidity in future trading. My point is, don't let the fantasy football cause a rift in the group. If the commish is a shady enough dude to actually engage in collusion, then you probably ought to consider leaving the league next year. Edited October 31, 2014 by BA Baracus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 In redrafters teams out of the playoffs have no business making trades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 I don't see that as a bad deal at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 I don't quite get this idea so many have that a team out of the playoffs (in a redraft) should not be allowed to make trades. Are they also not allowed to pickup and add players? Are they barred from trying to improve their team in anyway? How about just have a fixed trade deadline, and owners with a backbone and some morals so there is no colluding or dumping of players. If I'm out of the playoffs and I lose both my QBs, and I have other assets to trade to get a better player than I can off WW/FA, why shouldn't I be able to trade? Aren't you discouraging that owner from fielding the best team they can every week? Regarding the OP's question, the trade doesn't seem that lopsided. I am a little concerned about his point 1 and the whole veto system. Sounds like he thinks the commish changed veto rules without league approval, or some other stuff. Otherwise I think the owners against the trade believe their is collusion, or other favoritism because the 2 owners are friends, or their "better offers" were rebuffed. If you play in a league where you think owners (esp commish) would collude with each other, you should be questioning whether you play in that league next year. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorttynaz Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 I don't quite get this idea so many have that a team out of the playoffs (in a redraft) should not be allowed to make trades. Are they also not allowed to pickup and add players? Are they barred from trying to improve their team in anyway? How about just have a fixed trade deadline, and owners with a backbone and some morals so there is no colluding or dumping of players. If I'm out of the playoffs and I lose both my QBs, and I have other assets to trade to get a better player than I can off WW/FA, why shouldn't I be able to trade? Aren't you discouraging that owner from fielding the best team they can every week? Regarding the OP's question, the trade doesn't seem that lopsided. I am a little concerned about his point 1 and the whole veto system. Sounds like he thinks the commish changed veto rules without league approval, or some other stuff. Otherwise I think the owners against the trade believe their is collusion, or other favoritism because the 2 owners are friends, or their "better offers" were rebuffed. If you play in a league where you think owners (esp commish) would collude with each other, you should be questioning whether you play in that league next year. I agree with this. We have a "Season Points" prize as well to keep all teams active each week. If you block the teams who can't make the playoff's from trading or making any roster moves - that screws them from making a run at points. My team is a PERFECT example of this. I'm currently 11 points out of the points lead, but I'm on the bubble for the playoff's. I've had the worst effin luck this season in regards to weekly matchups as I seem to constantly get beat by the weekly high scorer. It's actually a running joke within our league at this point. The better option is to do as SG mentioned above. SET A TRADE DEADLINE! Typically it's week 8 in my leagues. This way there can be no attempted collusion as every team still "should" have a shot with 5 weeks remaining. Regardless, I mentioned this in an earlier post - I don't think this is an unfair offer. Megatron is an unknown. He may not me 100% when he comes back. Vereen and Smith could EASILY outperform him week after week. The potential is there if Megatron is the stud he used to be. If you ask me - this is just a case of the 2nd or 3rd place team getting pissed off that the 1st place team is distancing themselves from his immediate competition. I don't see any collusion in this deal.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 In redrafters teams out of the playoffs have no business making trades. OP stated that toilet bowl teams get their money back..therefore, they're not eliminated from winning money right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crankyrayhanky Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 Is it a buddy deal? Probably, but don't we all like to deal with people we like, and avoid those we do not? Regardless, the trade is fair; sounds like a bunch of whiners who are bitter they didn't get their deal done. 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.