ffjunkey Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 This situation might be a better topic for the fantasy advice forum, but I'm hoping for some Huddle vets to weigh in. Team A and Team B are in bringing up the rear in the league I'm in. Our weekly claim system and waiver wire are based on reverse order of the current team records, with fewer points scored being the next tie breaker. Team A (0-4) trades McFadden and Andre Johnson to team B (1-3) for Brandon Jacobs and Holt. This seems perfectly fine. I just noticed, however, that team B has dropped Steve Slaton and picked up Dominic Rhodes. Team B has Addai, so I understand wanting Rhodes for a handcuff, but seriously??? Did I miss something about Slaton not being the starter anymore? This seems like an unwise move to me (he also has Mendenhall and should be dropping him instead). Team A will have the first chance to pickup Slaton tomorrow. His team is not all that bad and he could easily make it back into contention (he has Warner, Randy Moss,, E. Graham, Houshmanzadeh, and now Jacobs + Holt). It seems a little fishy to me since team B dropped Slaton instead of Mendenhall, but It could have been an honest mistake. Should I complain if team B does not fight the "mistake" and team A picks up Slaton? Am I just being paranoid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abishagenaden Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 It seems like a weird waiver move, but if team A wanted Slaton from team B why couldn't team B just have thrown him into the initial trade deal then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdrudge Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 (edited) So you think it might be collusion on something that might happen in the future? Do you know for sure that he is going after Slaton? Edited October 2, 2008 by cdrudge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Cracker Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 In most leagues you have to wait a week to pick up any dropped player. That would solve your problem because the waiver order may be different next week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsr78 Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Same here . . .Slaton would not be available for pickup until the following waiver period . . .otherwise . . . would seen to be an very unwise move at the least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Something is out of whack there. I would ask the owner why he dropped Slaton and not Mendenhall at the very least. Then come back and and tell us what he said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egret Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 I dropped Slaton the week before he went off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 (edited) And why exactly do you feel the need to meddle in this? There's a reason Team B is near last place. He probably makes bad decisions. It looks like he made another one. Why do you think that the drop of Slaton couldn't be a mutually exclusive move from the trade? If the two teams were colluding, why wouldn't team B just include Slaton in the original trade? It could be reasonably and rationally justified. Or maybe team B is a bit more savvy than you seem to think he is, has his eye on an even greater WW plum, and has thrown Slaton onto the WW to increase his chance of getting this plum by allowing team A to pick up Slaton, whereas team A wouldn't have any interest in Mendenhall. By keeping Mendenhall on his roster, team B also essentially creates a roster spot for this potential plum. How about this: if you think Slaton is that viable, why not offer a conditional trade to team A so that you can acquire Slaton if team A does in fact pick him? Most importantly, what is your rationale for meddling in 2 other team's' business? Edited October 2, 2008 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 anyone dropping slaton and keeping mendenhall is an idiot (assuming this is a redraft league). if this person has a history of being an idiot, then he's just an idiot. if he has a history of being a savvy owner, then yes, there could be some goofiness going on here between the teams. since noone in their right mind would drop a starting RB for one that is done for the year, i think you have adequate grounds as commish to freeze slaton until you figure out what is going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chocula Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Most importantly, what is your rationale for meddling in 2 other team's' business? To keep the league fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 To keep the league fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 And why exactly do you feel the need to meddle in this? There's a reason Team B is near last place. He probably makes bad decisions. It looks like he made another one. Why do you think that the drop of Slaton couldn't be a mutually exclusive move from the trade? If the two teams were colluding, why wouldn't team B just include Slaton in the original trade? It could be reasonably and rationally justified. Or maybe team B is a bit more savvy than you seem to think he is, has his eye on an even greater WW plum, and has thrown Slaton onto the WW to increase his chance of getting this plum by allowing team A to pick up Slaton, whereas team A wouldn't have any interest in Mendenhall. By keeping Mendenhall on his roster, team B also essentially creates a roster spot for this potential plum. How about this: if you think Slaton is that viable, why not offer a conditional trade to team A so that you can acquire Slaton if team A does in fact pick him? Most importantly, what is your rationale for meddling in 2 other team's' business? Grr, I hate agreeing with BB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 (edited) Is this a keeper/dynasty league? If so dropping Slaton over Mendy makes some sense. edit and along with what BB said that if there is a guy that he really wants via FA but thinks the other guy will take slaton over him then it is a very good move to get the guy he really wants Edited October 2, 2008 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Grr, I hate agreeing with BB. It's kind of like an idealist Democrat who finally goes into management or owns his own company and then realizes his grave errors and how he should have been a Republican all along... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LooGie Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 (edited) It's kind of like an idealist Democrat who finally goes into management or owns his own company and then realizes his grave errors and how he should have been a Republican all along... nothing about this post surprises me...it all really makes sense now.... Edited October 2, 2008 by LooGie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ffjunkey Posted October 3, 2008 Author Share Posted October 3, 2008 I am paranoid because it turns out the drop of Slaton was a mistake. Thanks to all who provided feedback and I will try to come up with better material when I post again next year. 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.