Big Country Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 No it just means that he goes back to the draft after his keeper year is up. After being drafted again he is eligible as a keeper again for a year or 2 or whatever the rule is. But that's not what the rule says or what flemingd said in the post I quoted. Grits beat me to the auction/salary cap example. I think the one thing we can all agree on is that the rule could use some clarification. As noted above, in none of the leagues I was ever involved in did keeper status / contract years / salary stick with a player if they were cut from their FF team. I have played FF for 20 years, involved in multiple keeper/dynasty leagues for 15 of them. Obviously based on the comments from other posters, there are leagues where this happens, but I think I can venture a pretty safe guess that this is not the norm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I assume then you would mean this would carry over with the player in perpetuity. Once he has been kept once, never again can he be kept by any team at any point in his career? If written that way, sure. I'd never write a rule this ambigiously if I intended for them to be re-kept in the future. Our league actually reads "A player cannot be kept if he was kept the prior year" so it's not an issue for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 If written that way, sure. I'd never write a rule this ambigiously if I intended for them to be re-kept in the future. Our league actually reads "A player cannot be kept if he was kept the prior year" so it's not an issue for us. Yes, and if the rule was written that way, I would agree with you in this situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Nothing shady about this what so ever. Actually quite the opposite. Good pickup and I'd tell the rest of the league to stop whining cause they didn't had the foresight to do the same 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 That would be like saying that player salaries stick with them all year in an auction league. If an owner spends $100 of his salary cap to acquire player x and then subsequently cuts him that any other owner that picks up player x in that league is required to spend $100 of his salary cap. Which is perfectly possible. Again, it's all about how the rules are written. My homer rule reads, verbatim, "Player's Keeper values are locked on draft day. A player drafted in round 4 then dropped maintains his ... keeper value if someone else picks him up.". This could easily be auction value. In this case we specifically do not want someone picking up an injured guy or a guy in AP's situation and getting a freebie keeper out of it so we wrote the rules to prevent it. By definition a "keeper" is somebody on a roster whose services have been retained and who is not available to the other owners. As soon as he hits the free agent pool he is no longer a keeper on somebody's roster thus his keeper status is terminated. Just like at the end of 2 years his keeper status is terminated. No. I defined it as "A player can only be kept for one year". There's nothing indicating that he must be on a roster all year, or on the same roster all year, or any other qualifier. Once he's kept, he can't be kept again. And to BC's point earlier, in the absence of any further clarification, he wouldn't be able to be kept ever again under that rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Which is perfectly possible. Again, it's all about how the rules are written. My homer rule reads, verbatim, "Player's Keeper values are locked on draft day. A player drafted in round 4 then dropped maintains his ... keeper value if someone else picks him up.". This could easily be auction value. In this case we specifically do not want someone picking up an injured guy or a guy in AP's situation and getting a freebie keeper out of it so we wrote the rules to prevent it. No. I defined it as "A player can only be kept for one year". There's nothing indicating that he must be on a roster all year, or on the same roster all year, or any other qualifier. Once he's kept, he can't be kept again. And to BC's point earlier, in the absence of any further clarification, he wouldn't be able to be kept ever again under that rule. I would argue until I am blue in the face that a player in the free agency pool is not a "keeper". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I would argue until I am blue in the face that a player in the free agency pool is not a "keeper". Not sure why you need to argue if those are the rules that were voted in. Now the OP is a whole different story. We still haven't seen how his rules are written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalando Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 Not sure why you need to argue if those are the rules that were voted in. Now the OP is a whole different story. We still haven't seen how his rules are written. Up until this point, we have not had rules that say a keeper goes back into the draft at the end of the 2 years. I am being told by members of my league that this was suppose to be assumed. However, if he was cut from his team, I don't see how he isn't available for anyone to pick up? I guess the problem is that we did not have spelled out rules. If we had a rule that said a player went back into the draft at the end of his 2 years, then I obviously would not have picked him up... thanks for all the input! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 This right here. I play in 2 leagues that are 1 year keeper leagues and set up just like this. Doesn't matter if the guy is traded, dropped, suspended or whatever. If he was a keeper from the year before he goes back to the draft I don't play in this type of league but this seems like the cleanest way to run it. Otherwise you could trade guys or whatever to extend their keeper status. Seems like this would be the default if not discussed. If you want, put in a rule about free agents now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I don't play in this type of league but this seems like the cleanest way to run it. Otherwise you could trade guys or whatever to extend their keeper status. Seems like this would be the default if not discussed. If you want, put in a rule about free agents now. Traded players don't get extended contracts. When you trade a player his contract is unchanged, this is pretty standard. The issue here is what happens when a player is cut. I believe that the vast majority of leagues would default to any player cut is a standard free agent with no strings attached; i.e. any player acquired from the free agency pool is eligible to be kept the following year regardless of the fact that he may have started the year as a keeper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REZ Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Played this long enough to know that if you allow the keeper status to reset if a player is dropped, some owner will hoard his fa money and drop his stud and buy him back just so he could keep him again. Or drop when he's first in the waiver order. Even the best leagues I've been in has had crap happen that astounds me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JShady Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I started a keeper league a few seasons ago. When creating the rules for the league, myself and the other 2 co commissioners wanted a system where you sacrifice the draft round a player was taken in to keep him. We had trouble finding a fair way to deal with keeping free agents, so in the end we just decided that you cannot keep free agents. It looks like our decision can save our league all sorts of trouble like this example here. Also by not keeping FA it should keep more available talent for the draft each season. Maybe your league needs to overhaul its rule set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningMud Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Played this long enough to know that if you allow the keeper status to reset if a player is dropped, some owner will hoard his fa money and drop his stud and buy him back just so he could keep him again. Or drop when he's first in the waiver order. Even the best leagues I've been in has had crap happen that astounds me An easy way around this is to not allow the owner who dropped the player a chance to pick him back up unless he has already gone through one waiver period without being picked up. If no other owner picks up that player in a waiver claim, who cares if the owner picks him back up later on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningMud Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I think keeping him should be fine so long as you did not pick him up and stash him on IR. That could be seen as shady. I always try to prevent teams from picking up free agents and placing them on IR. If you used an active roster spot for him, he should be eligible to be kept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Traded players don't get extended contracts. When you trade a player his contract is unchanged, this is pretty standard. The issue here is what happens when a player is cut. I believe that the vast majority of leagues would default to any player cut is a standard free agent with no strings attached; i.e. any player acquired from the free agency pool is eligible to be kept the following year regardless of the fact that he may have started the year as a keeper. Just seems like this opens things up to possible collusion type stuff where an owner can drop someone for their buddy who's got the #1 waiver pickup and stuff like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn5033 Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 (edited) I don't play in this type of league but this seems like the cleanest way to run it. Otherwise you could trade guys or whatever to extend their keeper status. Seems like this would be the default if not discussed. If you want, put in a rule about free agents now. Just seems like this opens things up to possible collusion type stuff where an owner can drop someone for their buddy who's got the #1 waiver pickup and stuff like that. Yep, that is exactly why we do it that way. We don't want any shenanigans being pulled to try and keep players longer than the rules intended. It just makes the rule very clear so there are no arguments. As far as the OP's situation it seems their rules were not clear and that FA pick ups have been kept past their keeper eligibility before so he should be allowed to keep AP. And there is no doubt the other guys in the league are just mad they didn't do it. All I'm saying is now they have themselves a situation that will no doubt change the rules going forward. Edited August 12, 2015 by Finn5033 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 An easy way around this is to not allow the owner who dropped the player a chance to pick him back up unless he has already gone through one waiver period without being picked up. If no other owner picks up that player in a waiver claim, who cares if the owner picks him back up later on? This is exactly what we do in my keeper league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxBandit Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I believe that the vast majority of leagues would default to any player cut is a standard free agent with no strings attached; i.e. any player acquired from the free agency pool is eligible to be kept the following year regardless of the fact that he may have started the year as a keeper. I am 100% in agreement here. If my QB breaks his leg Week 1, and I don't want to roster him all season, I cut him with the full knowledge that another team with adequate roster space can pick him up, stash him, and potentially keep him the following season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Just seems like this opens things up to possible collusion type stuff where an owner can drop someone for their buddy who's got the #1 waiver pickup and stuff like that. That exists with or without the keeper stipulations. You are talking about collusion. You would obviously have to question why somebody would drop his keeper RB in the middle of a 1500 yard season. Nobody questioned why AP was dropped last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I DID have intent on keeping him this year when I picked him up. In the past, we have been able to keep FA pickups. There has never been the issue that a FA was also a last year keeper. I guess I didn't realize that this was an assumed rule that keepers un eneligible. I was just thinking I was a "savvy" owner. Seems like the rules will need to be clarified, going forward. Interested to hear more replies... I agree, I don't think you did anything underhanded or wrong. If the rules were clear that you could not keep him you probably don't add him and burn a roster spot on him. We do keepers but have no limits on them, we can keep any player on our roster at the end of the prior season. Doesn't matter how they were acquired. I can see the point of the system is to put players back into the pool for all teams every 2 years, and in that way you may have went against the spirit or intent of the rule. I also agree that it is sour grapes by your leauge. If this was Ray Rice and he's still unemployed in the NFL, are they complaining about it? Curious if a player is traded is there keeper status carried, so if in year one can keep next year, but if in year 2 you cannot. In that case the other owner really had no viable option but to cut him, or hold him and waste a roster spot for zero benefit. Rules clarification would help and address it going forward. Seems wrong to penalize you though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 And here's my problem. The intent is there, but yet you think in no way is this against the spirit of the keeper system? That due to the unprecedented suspension/not suspension of the NFL, the keeper system could not anticipate a correct setup for this? It did not for one instance occur to you that others in the league would have a problem with this? Again, yes you should get to keep him. But next time maybe ask about it flat out before doing something that might be considered shady. No one (especially commissioners) like having to litigate their league against people seeking exploits. E2A: When did you acquire him from the FA pool? What week? If others had a problem with this did the speak up when he signed AP from the free agent pool? Or only as we enter the next season and he wants to keep them and AP is expected to be a top RB again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Not sure why you need to argue if those are the rules that were voted in. Now the OP is a whole different story. We still haven't seen how his rules are written. Because Grits likes arguing If you play in a league and agree to the rules, then arguing against the rules is kind of silly. Why join if you don't agree with them? Owners who join a league with set rules intent on changing those rules are just a giant pain in the ass to the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinger Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Just looking for some opinions here... Last year, when Adrian Peterson was suspended, another owner who had him for his final year of the 2 years, dropped him. He was then able to pick up an additional player on his roster and have better options for winning the rest of the season. SO, during his suspension, i picked up AP and let him sit on my roster for the rest of the year so that i can keep him this year. My argument is that he became a FA when he was dropped and i picked him up, therefore making him eligible to keep this year. I haven't read the other replies to your issue, but this is our rules on keepers, protection status and etc. 4.3 Protection Rules A protected player can be kept on a roster for no more than 3 consecutive years (you can draft a player 1 year, then he can be kept twice after that). Undrafted Free Agents are always considered 1st year players. The “keeper clock” for a player (whether drafted, traded, or picked up on the waiver wire) begins from the time that he was first acquired as an Original Draft Pick or as an Undrafted Free Agent. The longest amount of time a player can be undrafted is three years. The only way for a players protection status to start over is, he must enter the free agent pool and be redrafted. Having a players protection status reset on draft night has eliminated this issue. I'm unsure what protection year AP is in your league, but in my league, he could be kept, as long as it's within the three year cycle. Add something into your rules to prevent this in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolly Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 The common suggestion seems to be that your league needs to have a rule written up for this situation in the future. It's apparent that nothing is written up that you can't do it but there also is nothing saying it can be done. I would probably see if some form of compromise can be worked out with the other managers in your league. I mean, do you really want to start the season off with your league pissed off at you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 The common suggestion seems to be that your league needs to have a rule written up for this situation in the future. It's apparent that nothing is written up that you can't do it but there also is nothing saying it can be done. I would probably see if some form of compromise can be worked out with the other managers in your league. I mean, do you really want to start the season off with your league pissed off at you? I'm curious what kind of compromise is there, they don't want him to be able to keep AP but he does. He used a roster spot on him for weeks with the plan of keeping him. The other owners think is is unfair (that they didn't think of it first), he's out some asset if they get their way. If he gets to keep him they're all a little but hurt. He says its a few owners, is it majority or really just a few? What if anything has the commissioner said, allowed or not, borderline legal move being debated, league vote, ??? As soon as he signed AP somebody should have spoken up. It was probably pretty clear then that AP would not return last year. Since its a keeper league the only reason for the move would be to keep him. Commish or another owner could have mentioned it then. Or the OP could have even asked the commissioner if he could keep him. But the time for that has passed, now we have one owner who is pissed or other owners who are. Other than one has more owners on its side what makes them more right. We've had owners in our league approach a commish and ask "can I?" and we'll tell them what we think, and if it a little fishy but within the rules we'll mention that. "Sure the rules allow that but its probably going to create problems with other owners." 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.