Trade voting thought process - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Trade voting thought process

Moderator: Football Moderators

Trade voting thought process

Postby mikus » Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:33 am

Several owners in my competitive league are voting down trades based on their personal beliefs and expections of players. It really is not fair because none of these trades are collusion, and both owners are getting players they want for equal prices.

I really think they should base their voting on the individual owner's needs/wants. For example, I am involved in the following trade:

I give DeAngelo Williams AND Joe Horn for Vincent Jackson

Williams has a ton of potential to be a starting RB in this league, and is one DeShaun Foster injury away from taking over the starting job. Joe Horn is old but the best WR on the Falcons roster (in terms of ability to catch). Vincent Jackson is unproven with a ton of potential and hype this year. I am getting him to add depth to my WR corps because I have Plaxico Burress and Chris Chambers. The other owner is getting Williams because he has a very shallow RB corps.

This trade obviously is not collusion, and after consulting the rosters makes a ton of sense for both owners.

I am just wondering what your thought process is when you are deciding to vote for/against a trade. What do you take into consideration? And what would you suggest I tell the owners about voting for trades in terms of what they should consider?
Image
Thanks to madaslives911 for the sweet sig!
The Hazean: Fantasy football galore
mikus
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 4658
Joined: 20 Aug 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Same place as every other blogger: My Mom's basement. That is where bloggers work, right?

Re: Trade voting thought process

Postby Kilroy » Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:24 am

Is it collusion?

Thought process over.

It's not for me to presume what is or isn't a good trade in another owner's opinion. What looks like lunacy to me may strike him as the greatest deal since the Cowboys fleeced the Vikes in the Walker fiasco.

It's his team to run as he sees fit, even if he runs it straight into the ground.
Image

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -- Voltaire
Kilroy
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe Musketeer
Posts: 13587
Joined: 6 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Making My List and Checking It Twice...

Re: Trade voting thought process

Postby knapplc » Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:30 am

Kilroy1872 wrote:Is it collusion?

Thought process over.

It's not for me to presume what is or isn't a good trade in another owner's opinion. What looks like lunacy to me may strike him as the greatest deal since the Cowboys fleeced the Vikes in the Walker fiasco.

It's his team to run as he sees fit, even if he runs it straight into the ground.

Great answer. Well put and spot on.

I have implemented a policy in my league that any trade can be challenged and if needed voted upon, but every vote is verbal (written on the website) and if you are voting against the deal your reason(s) MUST be explained in full or your vote does not count. If I determine that your reasons are not based on fears of collusion and instead show that you just don't want Team A to have Player B, your vote is disregarded.

I am "FOR" trades, and "AGAINST" stupid owners ruining my league because they want to Armchair Quarterback everyone else's team. You get to manage YOUR team, nobody else's. Trades that are not collusion, no matter how lopsided, are always approved.
Image
How 'bout them Huskers!
knapplc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18961
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: It's an L, not an I

Re: Trade voting thought process

Postby dream_017 » Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:42 am

I like to quote TBM for issues of veto/collusion
The Balanced Man wrote:1. FAIRNESS IS when the trade reasonably benefits both teams involved.

2. There is a Presumption of Fairness for all trades.

3. Three Factors involved in what reasonably benefits both include: Statistics, Potentiality, and Team Needs.

4. In order to reject a trade, you should feel that there are no reasonable benefits to both teams in Statistics Potentiality, and Team Needs. Hence, if one or more Factor is reasonably fair for both sides, and they are reasonably equivilent, the trade should be UPHELD. If no factor are reasonably fair, The Trade should be REJECTED.

5. The case may also exist where on player is high on one factor, and the other player is high on another. For example, one may want to trade a player that has very high potential (Ex: Steven Jackson) for a Player that is Statistically Superior (Ex: Andre Johnson). This trade should be accepted as long as you feel that it reasonably benefits both teams, even though the benefits to the teams do not derive from the same factor.

6. Statistics- Look at this by examining how statistics compare. The league suggests considering three year player averages, last years stats, and the stats for the current year.

7. Team Needs- Team Needs include: The need to fill a position (EX: A team is short on Quality RB), The need to change team structure in order to win more games (EX: I am 4-5 and need different personnel to gain different results), and the need to add depth to ones roster.

8. Potentiality- Potentiality is when a player has a chance to score many more points in upcoming weeks than they have previously. (EX: A RB starting because a starter will not play, addition of a Stud QB to an offense that will make a WR that much better, etc. However, a current stud player does not have any potential. A stud is statistically superior, but there is little chance that they will score many more points in upcoming weeks as compared to former weeks.
dream_017
Cafe Google
Cafe Google

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 15301
(Past Year: 58)
Joined: 3 Aug 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Ford Field: Section - 132; Row - 19; Seat - 11

Re: Trade voting thought process

Postby knapplc » Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:53 am

dream_017 wrote:I like to quote TBM for issues of veto/collusion
The Balanced Man wrote:1. FAIRNESS IS when the trade reasonably benefits both teams involved.

2. There is a Presumption of Fairness for all trades.

3. Three Factors involved in what reasonably benefits both include: Statistics, Potentiality, and Team Needs.

4. In order to reject a trade, you should feel that there are no reasonable benefits to both teams in Statistics Potentiality, and Team Needs. Hence, if one or more Factor is reasonably fair for both sides, and they are reasonably equivilent, the trade should be UPHELD. If no factor are reasonably fair, The Trade should be REJECTED.

5. The case may also exist where on player is high on one factor, and the other player is high on another. For example, one may want to trade a player that has very high potential (Ex: Steven Jackson) for a Player that is Statistically Superior (Ex: Andre Johnson). This trade should be accepted as long as you feel that it reasonably benefits both teams, even though the benefits to the teams do not derive from the same factor.

6. Statistics- Look at this by examining how statistics compare. The league suggests considering three year player averages, last years stats, and the stats for the current year.

7. Team Needs- Team Needs include: The need to fill a position (EX: A team is short on Quality RB), The need to change team structure in order to win more games (EX: I am 4-5 and need different personnel to gain different results), and the need to add depth to ones roster.

8. Potentiality- Potentiality is when a player has a chance to score many more points in upcoming weeks than they have previously. (EX: A RB starting because a starter will not play, addition of a Stud QB to an offense that will make a WR that much better, etc. However, a current stud player does not have any potential. A stud is statistically superior, but there is little chance that they will score many more points in upcoming weeks as compared to former weeks.

I think it boils down to how much control your league determines the Commissioner should have over trades. These rules imply that the Commissioner has the ability/right/obligation to second-guess whether or not a trade is beneficial to one owner or the other. That's cool for his league if they want to run it that way, but I will not run my league that way. I am actually resigning from a baseball league because the Commish has set up similar rules to these ^^^, and I dislike them.

Every league is different and those rules are not wrong, but I wouldn't be in that league.
Image
How 'bout them Huskers!
knapplc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18961
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: It's an L, not an I

Re: Trade voting thought process

Postby dream_017 » Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:02 am

knapplc wrote:
dream_017 wrote:I like to quote TBM for issues of veto/collusion
The Balanced Man wrote:1. FAIRNESS IS when the trade reasonably benefits both teams involved.

2. There is a Presumption of Fairness for all trades.

3. Three Factors involved in what reasonably benefits both include: Statistics, Potentiality, and Team Needs.

4. In order to reject a trade, you should feel that there are no reasonable benefits to both teams in Statistics Potentiality, and Team Needs. Hence, if one or more Factor is reasonably fair for both sides, and they are reasonably equivilent, the trade should be UPHELD. If no factor are reasonably fair, The Trade should be REJECTED.

5. The case may also exist where on player is high on one factor, and the other player is high on another. For example, one may want to trade a player that has very high potential (Ex: Steven Jackson) for a Player that is Statistically Superior (Ex: Andre Johnson). This trade should be accepted as long as you feel that it reasonably benefits both teams, even though the benefits to the teams do not derive from the same factor.

6. Statistics- Look at this by examining how statistics compare. The league suggests considering three year player averages, last years stats, and the stats for the current year.

7. Team Needs- Team Needs include: The need to fill a position (EX: A team is short on Quality RB), The need to change team structure in order to win more games (EX: I am 4-5 and need different personnel to gain different results), and the need to add depth to ones roster.

8. Potentiality- Potentiality is when a player has a chance to score many more points in upcoming weeks than they have previously. (EX: A RB starting because a starter will not play, addition of a Stud QB to an offense that will make a WR that much better, etc. However, a current stud player does not have any potential. A stud is statistically superior, but there is little chance that they will score many more points in upcoming weeks as compared to former weeks.

I think it boils down to how much control your league determines the Commissioner should have over trades. These rules imply that the Commissioner has the ability/right/obligation to second-guess whether or not a trade is beneficial to one owner or the other. That's cool for his league if they want to run it that way, but I will not run my league that way. I am actually resigning from a baseball league because the Commish has set up similar rules to these ^^^, and I dislike them.

Every league is different and those rules are not wrong, but I wouldn't be in that league.

If I recall from the original post this was taken from, TBM rarely uses a veto and based on these I see very few times a trade would be vetoed. I don't think he is necessarily second guessing all trades or evaluating all aspects of a trade, but I think the commish should be the one who has the control. You can't leave it up to the teams, because do you see how many should this be vetoed threads come through the cafe.
dream_017
Cafe Google
Cafe Google

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 15301
(Past Year: 58)
Joined: 3 Aug 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Ford Field: Section - 132; Row - 19; Seat - 11

Re: Trade voting thought process

Postby mikus » Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:13 am

dream_017 wrote:If I recall from the original post this was taken from, TBM rarely uses a veto and based on these I see very few times a trade would be vetoed. I don't think he is necessarily second guessing all trades or evaluating all aspects of a trade, but I think the commish should be the one who has the control. You can't leave it up to the teams, because do you see how many should this be vetoed threads come through the cafe.


What do you do, then, if the Commish is involved in a trade?
Image
Thanks to madaslives911 for the sweet sig!
The Hazean: Fantasy football galore
mikus
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 4658
Joined: 20 Aug 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Same place as every other blogger: My Mom's basement. That is where bloggers work, right?

Re: Trade voting thought process

Postby knapplc » Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:15 am

dream_017 wrote:If I recall from the original post this was taken from, TBM rarely uses a veto and based on these I see very few times a trade would be vetoed. I don't think he is necessarily second guessing all trades or evaluating all aspects of a trade, but I think the commish should be the one who has the control. You can't leave it up to the teams, because do you see how many should this be vetoed threads come through the cafe.

Well, and I am coloring my statement about not being in that league with the bad experience I've had with the baseball league I referred to. That Commish was/is a jerk and is very much interested in controlling things. I'm not implying TBM is that way.

I suppose it's probably best to have rules like that written down so you can rely on them if you have to, but at the same time be more lenient at your discretion. I can say that if my guys started pushing the limits of the rule I would consider making it more strict, but I would also first consider removing the offending owners.

Thank goodness I don't have to give that serious thought - I have a good group of guys. ;-D
Image
How 'bout them Huskers!
knapplc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18961
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: It's an L, not an I

Re: Trade voting thought process

Postby dream_017 » Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:25 am

knapplc wrote:Thank goodness I don't have to give that serious thought - I have a good group of guys. ;-D


Now that is the main thing ;-D That is how I join my leagues, making sure I know who the commish is, try to get the rules of the league and make sure that the other owners are good group of guys. It may not seem like it, with all of the leagues I have listed below, but I am very picky on the leagues I join, because I hate to have leagues fold or bad owners get in the way of a good, fun, competitive league.
dream_017
Cafe Google
Cafe Google

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 15301
(Past Year: 58)
Joined: 3 Aug 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Ford Field: Section - 132; Row - 19; Seat - 11

Re: Trade voting thought process

Postby dream_017 » Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:27 am

mikus wrote:
dream_017 wrote:If I recall from the original post this was taken from, TBM rarely uses a veto and based on these I see very few times a trade would be vetoed. I don't think he is necessarily second guessing all trades or evaluating all aspects of a trade, but I think the commish should be the one who has the control. You can't leave it up to the teams, because do you see how many should this be vetoed threads come through the cafe.


What do you do, then, if the Commish is involved in a trade?

There is usually a co-comish or 2 of them, in case 1 or more is involved in a trade. This goes in part to my other post above, make sure you know who you are playing with
dream_017
Cafe Google
Cafe Google

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 15301
(Past Year: 58)
Joined: 3 Aug 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Ford Field: Section - 132; Row - 19; Seat - 11

Next

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron
Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 9:57 hours
(and 43 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


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