Fair trades?

[Big John]

From one Fellow Hooiser to another

troublez

 

Huddler

**

Group: Members

Joined: Aug 28, 2010

From: Montreal, QC

Member No.: 23,863

Fan of the: Colts

 

[troublez]

Moved to QC from Indianapolis, May of this year for a job.

[Menudo]

I like you for the most part. I do. But I could not care less what you think about this.

 

It is not in my ultimate wisdom solely, but rather an unvoted on but discussed consensus. But I am for sure the person who solely goes into MFL and undoes them.

 

In 15 years there may have been two maybe three trades that were undone and they both involved guys fairly new to FF. I'm pretty sure it wouldn;'t be an issue with the stable, competitive ownership we've had for the past several years.

 

I've got no issue with you either. However, I think deciding what you think is a ridiculous trade is......well, ridiculous on your part. Who are you to decide what is fair ? Can you see the future and know what is going to happen ? Stopping a trade for anything other than collusion is ridiculous. In my leagues, I know every team is in it to win it. They only trade to try to better their team. Who am I to step in and say what is fair and what isn't fair. I can't predict the future, and I admit there have been many times where I thought someone made out on a trade, where they actually lost out on it. Unless you are willing to refund someone's money if you are wrong, I think stopping a trade based on your feelings about it is ridiculous.

Edited October 1, 2011 by Menudo

[Duchess Jack]

I agree.No one but you manages your team. But if yer an f'ing idiot and it's plain as day to everyone else and it hurts the league as a result, that doesn't work for our guys and as commish, I'll involve myself,.

 

It's easy. Don't be an fing idiot.

 

I am really interested to hear about a question that was asked of you? What happens if you are wrong and the trade happens to be awesome.

 

I like to tell a story of a league I run wherein something like 3 years ago (when J Stewart was looked to be starting and Turner was backup) a cat in our league traded Addai for Turner, DeAngelo and somebody else who ended up being awesome. People were all up in arms that the guy getting Addai was getting killed. The following year DeAngelo and Turner led our league in scoring (and whoever the third guy was, ended up being top 20)

[McBoog]

Both are perfectly fair if that is what the team OWNERS want. Stay out of their business.

[Cunning Runt]

Who are you to decide what is fair ? Can you see the future and know what is going to happen ? Stopping a trade for anything other than collusion is ridiculous. In my leagues, I know every team is in it to win it. They only trade to try to better their team. Who am I to step in and say what is fair and what isn't fair. I can't predict the future, and I admit there have been many times where I thought someone made out on a trade, where they actually lost out on it. Unless you are willing to refund someone's money if you are wrong, I think stopping a trade based on your feelings about it is ridiculous.

 

 

Again - it's not just me. It's the unvoted collective opinion of the other owners.

 

The future does not matter one iota in my opinion and I think that may be the disconnect in our viewpoionts.

 

Example: Let's say someone trades Bernard Scott for Ray Rice. Their rationale could be that they see Benson slowing down/suspended and maybe Rice having a tough run schedule coming up.

 

Our ownership would 100 percent NOT let that trade go through. And if they didn't, as commish, I would personally see to it that it didn't go through.

 

If you and others would choose not to be in a league where this kind of BS is not allowed, then we wouldn't want you - simple as that.

[Cunning Runt]

I am really interested to hear about a question that was asked of you? What happens if you are wrong and the trade happens to be awesome.

 

That's easy. Nothing.

 

If they don't want to be in the league next year, it's up to them.

 

But I'm interested if you even bothered to read where I said it's happened maybe 2-3 times in the last 15yrs? You people read waaaaay too much into what I'm saying and act as if it's a daily occurrence. It most definitely is not.

 

But it also is a tool I believe a league must have and use where the situation warrants.

[Bronco Billy]

That's easy. Nothing.

 

If they don't want to be in the league next year, it's up to them.

 

But I'm interested if you even bothered to read where I said it's happened maybe 2-3 times in the last 15yrs? You people read waaaaay too much into what I'm saying and act as if it's a daily occurrence. It most definitely is not.

 

But it also is a tool I believe a league must have and use where the situation warrants.

 

You failed to answer the question. If you vetoed a trade based upon your opinion of unfairness, and then the owner you opine is getting screwed because the player he would have gotten would instead have gotten a player that performs better, or even worse that he failed to make the playoffs because of your decision, do you refund his money? Seems to me you now have an undeniable liability to account for your decision financially if you are proven to be wrong, and most especially if you affect another team's season for the worse.

 

And my response to your other points is that anyone who has played FF for any time at all knows damn well that future performance is unpredicable - which is the best reason of all to stay the hell out of others' business except in the most egregious cases. A current top 10 WR who has been tweaked all season and appears to be getting progressively worse health-wise for a top 20 FF WR hardly reaches the point of being egregious,

Edited October 1, 2011 by Bronco Billy

[Cunning Runt]

You failed to answer the question. If you vetoed a trade based upon your opinion of unfairness, and then the owner you opine is getting screwed because the player he would have gotten would instead have gotten a player that performs better, or even worse that he failed to make the playoffs because of your decision, do you refund his money? Seems to me you now have an undeniable liability to account for your decision financially if you are proven to be wrong, and most especially if you affect another team's season for the worse.

 

And my response to your other points is that anyone who has played FF for any time at all knows damn well that future performance is unpredicable - which is the best reason of all to stay the hell out of others' business except in the most egregious cases. A current top 10 WR who has been tweaked all season and appears to be getting progressively worse health-wise for a top 20 FF WR hardly reaches the point of being egregious,

 

I did answer the question by saying "nothing". If this is what you need to hear, let me say it this way: NO - NO REFUND. He's welcome to play in another league the next year if he didn't like what the collective opinion of the league felt about his trade.

 

And the "egregious" is what we're talking about so thanks for agreeing with me. We may just have a different definition. My example of Bernard Scott for Ray Rice would be egregious in my definition.

[Duchess Jack]

I did answer the question by saying "nothing". If this is what you need to hear, let me say it this way: NO - NO REFUND. He's welcome to play in another league the next year if he didn't like what the collective opinion of the league felt about his trade.

 

And the "egregious" is what we're talking about so thanks for agreeing with me. We may just have a different definition. My example of Bernard Scott for Ray Rice would be egregious in my definition.

so, seeing as you are the final arbitor of a good vs bad trade and that it doesn't have all that much to do with an amount of votes - what if folk decided a trade that you made sucks? Are you still the final arbitor of good vs bad? If you have reasons to have made the trade that you believe in but others don't see or understand can you just ignore them?

[Bronco Billy]

I did answer the question by saying "nothing". If this is what you need to hear, let me say it this way: NO - NO REFUND. He's welcome to play in another league the next year if he didn't like what the collective opinion of the league felt about his trade.

 

And the "egregious" is what we're talking about so thanks for agreeing with me. We may just have a different definition. My example of Bernard Scott for Ray Rice would be egregious in my definition.

 

You already defined White for Boldin as egregious in an earlier post, so why you feel the need to reach for a Rice/Scott trade I'm not sure.

 

So you feel that you have the authority and responsibility to make judgments based upon nothing more than your perception of value, but if those decisions damage an owner in your league that you then have no responsibility to the owner who you damaged?

 

You need to resign as a commish. I feel sorry for those in your leagues, but if they are willing to put up with that kind of crap - well, PT Barnum had it right...

Edited October 1, 2011 by Bronco Billy

[gbpfan1231]

You already defined White for Boldin as egregious in an earlier post, so why you feel the need to reach for a Rice/Scott trade I'm not sure.

 

So you feel that you have the authority and responsibility to make judgments based upon nothing more than your perception of value, but if those decisions damage an owner in your league that you then have no responsibility to the owner who you damaged?

 

You need to resign as a commish. I feel sorry for those in your leagues, but if they are willing to put up with that kind of crap - well, PT Barnum had it right...

If his league is 12 teams and those 12 owners are OK with then fine - why do you even care?

 

You and maybe most people think that it is crap all that really matters are the owners in that specific league.

 

Just my opinion.

[Bronco Billy]

If his league is 12 teams and those 12 owners are OK with then fine - why do you even care?

 

You and maybe most people think that it is crap all that really matters are the owners in that specific league.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Then he shouldn't have put it on the table for discussion. Not sure why you care whether I care. It's a FF message board. If stuff like this is brought up, it gets discussed.

 

He stated a need to run other people's teams for them to save them from what he considered their own bad judgment. I would like to know why he doesn't feel a responsibility if his decisions are wrong. Instead, he pretty much tells the other owners to kiss his ass and quit if they don't like it.

Edited October 1, 2011 by Bronco Billy

[gbpfan1231]

Then he shouldn't have put it on the table for discussion. Not sure why you care whether I care. It's a FF message board. If stuff like this is brought up, it gets discussed.

I can see discussing it but you actually are telling him he should resign as commish. That is mainly what I was getting it - go ahead and discuss it and say why you may or may not like it but to go out and tell someone they should resign as commish even though the people in that league seem to have no problem with it is just a tad over the top. Again - just my opinion.

[Cunning Runt]

You already defined White for Boldin as egregious in an earlier post, so why you feel the need to reach for a Rice/Scott trade I'm not sure.

 

So you feel that you have the authority and responsibility to make judgments based upon nothing more than your perception of value, but if those decisions damage an owner in your league that you then have no responsibility to the owner who you damaged?

 

You need to resign as a commish. I feel sorry for those in your leagues, but if they are willing to put up with that kind of crap - well, PT Barnum had it right...

 

Ha.

 

If you say so. I've tried to step down so many times you wouldn't believe. The guys in my league love the job I do and basically talk me back into every year. It's in large part because I'm fair to a fault and because I hold myself to a higher level than I do of the the others in the league for the sole reason that I do not want anyone to question my integrity. Our league runs very smoothly - hardly ever any contoversy.

 

Again - you make it sound as if trades are overtruned daily. 2-3 in 15 years is not exactly what I call an abuse of power.

 

And by the way, I wouldn't have to challenge the White for Boldin trade - the rest of league would chime in immediately with me not saying a word. And then yes, I would overturn it.

[Cunning Runt]

Then he shouldn't have put it on the table for discussion. Not sure why you care whether I care. It's a FF message board. If stuff like this is brought up, it gets discussed.

 

He stated a need to run other people's teams for them to save them from what he considered their own bad judgment. I would like to know why he doesn't feel a responsibility if his decisions are wrong. Instead, he pretty much tells the other owners to kiss his ass and quit if they don't like it.

 

 

I did? I do? Don't put words into my mouth in order to make your argument, because that just makes you look stupid.

 

2-3 times in 15yrs. What part of that don't you get?

 

And even then only if the league is in an uproar over a trade.

 

The whole gist of my point is that I think those that say you can only overturn a trade because of collusion are wrong. A trade can and should be overturned if it's a "dumb ass" trade. And it's kind of like porn. Not sure how to describe it, but you know it when you see it.

[Bronco Billy]

Ha.

 

If you say so. I've tried to step down so many times you wouldn't believe. The guys in my league love the job I do and basically talk me back into every year. It's in large part because I'm fair to a fault and because I hold myself to a higher level than I do of the the others in the league for the sole reason that I do not want anyone to question my integrity. Our league runs very smoothly - hardly ever any contoversy.

 

Again - you make it sound as if trades are overtruned daily. 2-3 in 15 years is not exactly what I call an abuse of power.

 

And by the way, I wouldn't have to challenge the White for Boldin trade - the rest of league would chime in immediately with me not saying a word. And then yes, I would overturn it.

 

And yet you dance around the issue. If you overturn this trade, and then Boldin goes on to a better year than White, and if that is the case perhaps the wronged owner - and he would be wronged in those circumstances - gets no compensation from the decision you made that wronged him. And yet you stand on your integrity and fairness. In fact you say you'd tell the offended owner to piss off and quit the league if he made his case against you.

 

That just doesn't jibe. How do you rationalize that? I'm trying to get into your head as to how this is fair and just to you. It doesn't make any sense at all to me.

Edited October 1, 2011 by Bronco Billy

[DanTheMan_5]

Every year there are studs who prove worthless. Who was to say after week 2 that Roddy couldn't have been 1 of them. I'm not saying I think that, but it's not as if it's completely out of the realm of possibility that Boldin outproduces WHite in any given season. Or perhaps the Bye weeks work out better for him.

 

I agree that the trade should be approved.

Edited October 1, 2011 by DanTheMan_5

[Menudo]

And yet you dance around the issue. If you overturn this trade, and then Boldin goes on to a better year than White, and if that is the case perhaps the wronged owner - and he would be wronged in those circumstances - gets no compensation from the decision you made that wronged him. And yet you stand on your integrity and fairness. In fact you say you'd tell the offended owner to piss off and quit the league if he made his case against you.

 

That just doesn't jibe. How do you rationalize that? I'm trying to get into your head as to how this is fair and just to you. It doesn't make any sense at all to me.

 

I'm with you 100%. He claims that he shows complete integrity, but, to me, showing complete integrity would be compensating someone who you cheated out of his chance to win. If I tried to trade White for Boldin, and you didn't allow it. Boldin outscored White by enough that I would have made the playoffs or won the league, you have completed cheated me out of my win because you thought you could see the future. You would have been proven completely wrong, and you would have cheated me out of what was rightfully mine. For all of that, you would tell me if I didn't like it, I can leave the league. Sorry, but, that is the exact opposite of integrity as a commissioner.

[Bronco Billy]

I'm with you 100%.

 

I may have to rethink my position....

[Cunning Runt]

And yet you dance around the issue. If you overturn this trade, and then Boldin goes on to a better year than White, and if that is the case perhaps the wronged owner - and he would be wronged in those circumstances - gets no compensation from the decision you made that wronged him. And yet you stand on your integrity and fairness. In fact you say you'd tell the offended owner to piss off and quit the league if he made his case against you.

 

That just doesn't jibe. How do you rationalize that? I'm trying to get into your head as to how this is fair and just to you. It doesn't make any sense at all to me.

 

 

What exactly am I dancing around? You may not like my response but I'm certainly not dancing around it. You though seem to have a close mind and have not reading or have ignored what I've said. It's happened maybe 2-3 times, so it's not exactly like it's a daily occurrence.

 

I don't need to rationalize it you. I'm perfectly comfortable in the knowledge that my very competitive leaguemates respect my work and there's basically a waiting list to get in.

 

I don't "tell an owner to piss off" Again - quit putting words in my mouth. It's unbecoming of you, so please stop. What we would do in those rare instances is reverse it as if it never happened and both owners do their thing from there.

 

If they decide they've been so wronged that they choose not to play in the league again, that's up to them. How exactly does that equal "piss off"?

It sounds like you want me to admit that they've been damaged and are due something. I simply won't go down that road with you. I've been very consistent.

 

But seriously, re-read my posts. You're getting your panties in a bunch over the concept, not the practical application and then you're just putting sh-t out there saying I've said such-and-such and you're just flat out misrepresenting my comments and position and I frankly don't appreciate it.

[Menudo]

I may have to rethink my position....

 

[Bronco Billy]

If they decide they've been so wronged that they choose not to play in the league again, that's up to them. How exactly does that equal "piss off"?

It sounds like you want me to admit that they've been damaged and are due something. I simply won't go down that road with you. I've been very consistent.

 

But seriously, re-read my posts. You're getting your panties in a bunch over the concept, not the practical application and then you're just putting sh-t out there saying I've said such-and-such and you're just flat out misrepresenting my comments and position and I frankly don't appreciate it.

 

It's their league as much as it is yours! Geez, that's patently obvious to almost everyone but you here, I think. When you are telling them that they can quit their own league if they don't like your decision, it's exactly telling them to piss off. Their money and contribution is every bit as important to the league as yours, and they have just as equal a right to run their team as you do yours.

 

That you won't admit that you could possibly make a mistake that costs someone - due only to your biases and judgment and nothing more, since you can't possibly know the outcome of future events, goes directly to the root of the issue.

 

I know you're a smart and thoughtful person, and as such I'm wondering how you can willfully overlook this kind of possibility and simply deny it could happen, and if it did happen that you would have no responsibility for it.

 

Now, I've re-read everyone of your posts, and that is precisely your position. Show me something here that is contrary to that.

[Cunning Runt]

I'm with you 100%. He claims that he shows complete integrity, but, to me, showing complete integrity would be compensating someone who you cheated out of his chance to win. If I tried to trade White for Boldin, and you didn't allow it. Boldin outscored White by enough that I would have made the playoffs or won the league, you have completed cheated me out of my win because you thought you could see the future. You would have been proven completely wrong, and you would have cheated me out of what was rightfully mine. For all of that, you would tell me if I didn't like it, I can leave the league. Sorry, but, that is the exact opposite of integrity as a commissioner.

 

Ok by me if you feel that way.

 

Like I said - I'm perfectly comfortable knowing that my leaguemates don't feel the same and do not want another commissioner because they know the league is run properly and fairly. That's the only validation I need.

 

I am 100 percent certain that if you were in a league I commished, you'd feel the same despite your weak arguments.

 

And listen, it's happened only a couple of times in 15 years. You guys are f-cking dense. Seriously.

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Ok by me if you feel that way.

 

Like I said - I'm perfectly comfortable knowing that my leaguemates don't feel the same and do not want another commissioner because they know the league is run properly and fairly. That's the only validation I need.

 

I am 100 percent certain that if you were in a league I commished, you'd feel the same despite your weak arguments.

 

And listen, it's happened only a couple of times in 15 years. You guys are f-cking dense. Seriously.

 

 

I have read everything you have had to say carefully. There is one thing you have not touched upon yet, and that is how often this has happened. Could you share that fact with us. I'm thinking if it is the exception rather than the rule that there is no reason to even discuss the principle of the matter.