Ethics: Three Interesting Scenarios. - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Ethics: Three Interesting Scenarios.

Moderator: Football Moderators

Ethics: Three Interesting Scenarios.

Postby Favre.com » Tue Nov 28, 2006 8:56 pm

Ethics is a popular around fantasy so I thought I would bring up 3 unique scenarios to start up a long discussion as to what you see them is in the ethics world.

Scenario A: Team A and Team B are fighting for the last playoff spot. They are the only two teams that have a chance to make it as the others below them have been mathematically eliminated. Prize money is involved and everyone making the playoffs receives some sort of prize. The week prior to the last week of the regular season Team A's QB is hurt and is out for the year. Team B was watching the game and immediately logs on the fantasy site and drops their entire bench for every starting QB available on the WW. Team A has no QB to start for the last week of the regular season. Whats your take?

Scenario B: In a league with all friends and people you know very well in real life, a Team A fighting for the playoffs offers trades nonstop. As the commish, you log onto the site at one point to see a pending trade. The last place team (a guy you are good friends with, call him Team B) has accepted an offer where they give Team A LT2 in exchange for McGahee and Derrick Mason. You immediately contact Team B and Team A (you know both very well personally) and Team A states that since he is in last place he feels that his WR core is so bad that he wanted Mason and McGahee should go off with his easy schedule. You are 100% sure there is no collusion since you know both of these guys exceptionally well. What do you do?

Scenario C: Leading up to Christmas your brother and cousin are both in your fantasy league. They both have seperate teams and have been bitter rivals the entire season. Your cousin beats your brother a week before the trade deadline effectively knocking him out of the playoffs. While all of you are in a room talking football your brother says "well, I'm out of it. I guess I can give you LT2 as your Christmas present". You all laugh but when you visit the site the trade is up of LT2 for Carnell Williams. You were present during the "trade talks" and so no collusion was present. Whats your action?
Image
Zito is God in the Baseball Cafe
Favre.com
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 819
(Past Year: 16)
Joined: 7 Aug 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Getting Back to the Line of Scrimmage

Postby buffalobillsrul2002 » Tue Nov 28, 2006 8:59 pm

A. No problem with it... Guy is trying to help his own team.. in a 2-team race like that, sure, why not?

B. Depends if you believe the guy's answer. If you believe him, it's OK. If you don't, it's not.

C. Collusion, no doubt about it. DOn't do it.
buffalobillsrul2002
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant


Posts: 635
Joined: 17 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby JasonSeahorn » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:04 pm

A. Nothing to do, Team B forfeits his chances because all he has are QBs, and he is hoping his act causes Team A to lose in the playoffs. I really don't see the reason for Team B doing that, if Team A will get some prize for making the playoffs.

B. I really don't like it because mcgahee and mason come NO WHERE NEAR enough value for LT. I would tell Team A to make a more reasonable offer...at least a WR1 and RB2.

C. Don't let that trade through.
Image

Thanks to deluxe_247 for sig, he is welcome to sail with the Captain too!

I will win all of the fantasy cafe games.....next year
JasonSeahorn
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5309
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Beantown, Taxachusetts

Postby TaDa » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:06 pm

A) No problem with it at all. It's strategy

B) This is a horrible trade, but since you're sure that there is no collusion, it's not vetoable.

C) Collusion.
Image
TaDa
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe Ranker
Posts: 4232
(Past Year: 100)
Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby programatik » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:11 pm

A) Stupid but acceptable. Tell the other team to pickup anyone worth value that was dropped and trade someone else for QB really quick :)

B) if he truley believe it will help his team. but if he is that bad off with LT on his team he needs God (QB/RB/WR flex) to save face.

C) Collusion. they said it while you were there. don't let it go.
Image
programatik
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff


Posts: 169
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Postby smackthefirst » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:13 pm

Not too difficult in my eyes.

A) You let it go. This is why I like to freeze add/drops until Tuesday morning so things like this don't occur. However, if the rules allow it, then there is nothing wrong or unethical about it.

B) If you believe them, you let it go. Just because you don't think the trade is fair doesn't mean it can be veto'd because different people will value players differently.

C) Hahahaha, and to now go against what I said for B. This does get veto'd however not because of the Christmas gift comment. I like to keep a "get out of jail free" card in my rules for scenario's I didn't forsee happening. The rule is simply "To maintain the integrity of the league, I reserve the right to amend any rule throughout the year, but only when in agreement with over 80% of the league." In this case, I think a straight up trade like this ruins the integrity of the league. No one, and I mean no one, would value Caddy over LT. Now Caddy and something, then maybe. But one for one trades are easy to spot out as being horribly lopsided.

As for people who will say thye don't like the "get out of jail free" card, try this one for size. Team A was in dire need of a QB and there were none on the WW. Team B was a little weak at WR. Team A wanted to offer Reggie Williams for JP Losman, but inadvertantly offered Reggie and Roy Williams for JP Losman. Now this wasn't collusion but it greatly affected the integrity of the league as the rest of the owners saw it. I eventually convinced Team B to return the offer and had the teams come to the agreement that a "consideration" had to be given to Team B because this was ultimately caused by Team's A lack of paying attention. In the end the trade was JP Losman for Reggie Williams and Nate Kaeding.
Image
My Playoff Team - Please Comment
MSchaub, DMcNabb, JFreeman, KKolb
SJackson, THightower, CWells, JForsett, JSnelling, CJennings, QGanther
RWayne, RMoss, RMeachem, MCrabtree, DBowe
VDavis
smackthefirst
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Graphics ExpertEagle EyeMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 2646
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: MD

Postby Matthias » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:17 pm

A) I slap around the guy and ask him what kind of dweeb he is. But let it stand.

B) Whatever.

C) Veto.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 2398
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Deathwarmedover » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:18 pm

Good examples all.


Scenario A is a totally reasonable strategy. If however, he simply cycled the QBs ie picking one up and dropping him so he would be on waivers until after his game that would be a problem

Scenario B is also not vetoable assuming you know there is no collusion. In one of my leagues a trade went through last year right after the draft of TO a 1st round pick (keeper league) for Mike Anderson who at the time was the short yardage back in Denver and a 4th round selection. It was allowed to go through because even though it was obviously a horrible trade for one person he was trying to improve his team.

Scenario C veto this trade and lock the roster of the team with LT. He is not trading in good faith.


Steve
Deathwarmedover
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 656
Joined: 5 Mar 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Deathwarmedover » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:18 pm

Good examples all.


Scenario A is a totally reasonable strategy. If however, he simply cycled the QBs ie picking one up and dropping him so he would be on waivers until after his game that would be a problem

Scenario B is also not vetoable assuming you know there is no collusion. In one of my leagues a trade went through last year right after the draft of TO a 1st round pick (keeper league) for Mike Anderson who at the time was the short yardage back in Denver and a 4th round selection. It was allowed to go through because even though it was obviously a horrible trade for one person he was trying to improve his team.

Scenario C veto this trade and lock the roster of the team with LT. He is not trading in good faith.


Steve
Deathwarmedover
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 656
Joined: 5 Mar 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Postby steelerfan513 » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:21 pm

A. Team A should've drafted a backup QB, and Team B is stupid for thinking that this move won't hurt their team at all. Nothing you can do.

B. There are two types of trades that can be vetoed: collusion, and completely idiotic trades. I think that in this case, it's close, but it isnt a vetoable trade

C. Collusion. Veto this trade.
Image
Image
Kudos to Leber for the amazing sig and to Metroid for the userbar and making them both fit
2008 and 2009 Defunct Dynasty League Champion
steelerfan513
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 11906
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Next

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 22:27 hours
(and 34 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact