Questionable trade (extenuating circumstances) - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Commissioner's Corner

Questionable trade (extenuating circumstances)

Moderator: Football Moderators

Questionable trade (extenuating circumstances)

Postby My team is injured » Fri Nov 14, 2008 10:32 am

We have a 10 team keeper league with 2 teams that are now mathematically eliminated from playoff contention, and no money is awarded for points either so they have zero chance of winning any money this year. IMO, the only trades they should be permitted to make are trades that improve their keeper situation (it's only 1 keeper per team). I would think this would be self-evident and as I was looking to improve my team prior to the trade deadline, I decided against making offers to them as I wasn't going to ship them a keeper.

However, there is one caveat I should mention that I realized this morning as I was planning on rejecting a pending trade offer. The 4 teams that don't make the playoffs play in a 2 round, single-elimination contest in weeks 14 and 15 to determine who gets the top pick in next year's draft (so as to discourage owners from tanking it to get this pick).

However, I'm inclined to think this negligible benefit shouldn't really come into play in this situation and trades between eliminated teams and teams in contention, particularly questionable trades, shouldn't be allowed (keeper trades aside). I'm also quite skeptical that this 4 team "play-off" is even a part of the equation in the pending trade and think it's moreso 2 buddies colluding but that's another matter.

I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.
All of my analysis is based on PPR
My team is injured
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

Cafe Blackjack ChampionMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 413
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Questionable trade (extenuating circumstances)

Postby Matthias » Fri Nov 14, 2008 10:42 am

You're being a bit opaque, but if what you're trying to say is there should be a rule: "Teams which have been eliminated from the playoffs cannot trade except to improve their keeper situation" then I don't really like it, but other people have said they have it in their leagues, so it's at least been done. People can be playing for personal pride and nothing else; in one league I'm 2-7, obviously out of contention, but still want to win every week.

But if you don't trust the guys involved then that's something else on its own.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


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

Re: Questionable trade (extenuating circumstances)

Postby My team is injured » Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:53 pm

Thanks for the response.

I hear you on the competitive aspect as I feel the same way, and we typically get on owners who fall out of contention and don't keep trying to win each week. But that generally involves moreso waiver wire acquisitions and paying attention to one's lineup than trades (not that it can't involve trades).

I guess the problem stems from not having much trust in the owners in this league as the league has devolved a bit since I joined a few years back with multiple owners leaving and being replaced with friends of this one guy in the league (who then trades frequently with them). Some of these owners have shown they are competent and trying to win and I haven't had issues with multiple trades in which I would pretty clearly prefer one side over the other.

However, in the case of the trade in question, the owner is in his first year in the league, has just one win so far, has been quite incompetent (dropped his sole backup TE Greg Olsen unnecessarily for a K when we roster 2 at each position), and has multiple empty spots on his roster. With him now mathematically eliminated, there's a questionable pending trade between him and his buddy (the guy who has recruited multiple friends to join the league).

I don't think I would have an issue with trades being permissible despite teams being out of contention if I did indeed have trust in all the owners around the league. But I absolutely don't have anywhere near that trust in this league, and that's probably the main reason why I feel there should be such a rule (though that probably speaks moreso to the larger issue of not having trust in the owners in the league).
All of my analysis is based on PPR
My team is injured
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

Cafe Blackjack ChampionMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 413
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Questionable trade (extenuating circumstances)

Postby dupree » Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:03 pm

Let me get this straight, they aren't colluding to help one team get into the playoffs (as both are elminated) they aren't colluding to help one team get the first pick of the draft by winning the consolation ladder (both would want this). Wouldn't these 2 reasons be the only thing to stop a trade? Just b/c you think it is meaningless doesn't mean it should be vetoed....

I must be missing some finer point....
dupree
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff

User avatar

Posts: 247
Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Questionable trade (extenuating circumstances)

Postby My team is injured » Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:21 pm

Nah, my bad.

Team A is out of contention and has a pending trade with Team B (tied for 2nd in a 5 team division in which 3 teams get in). Team A is a new guy who was brought in by Team B.

I was only referring to the 2 eliminated teams in my initial post to speak to what trades they should be allowed to make with other owners in the league. Only one of them is involved in this trade.
Last edited by My team is injured on Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
All of my analysis is based on PPR
My team is injured
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

Cafe Blackjack ChampionMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 413
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Questionable trade (extenuating circumstances)

Postby Matthias » Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:24 pm

My team is injured wrote:However, in the case of the trade in question, the owner is in his first year in the league, has just one win so far, has been quite incompetent (dropped his sole backup TE Greg Olsen unnecessarily for a K when we roster 2 at each position), and has multiple empty spots on his roster. With him now mathematically eliminated, there's a questionable pending trade between him and his buddy (the guy who has recruited multiple friends to join the league).

There's an argument to be had either way about people who are mathematically eliminated from doing trades, but there is no argument (other than keepers) of someone who is not even keeping his roster active from doing trades with teams that are still in it. Given that this is this guy's first year and that you don't know him, he only knows the guy he's trading with, I would vote to lock this guy's roster for the rest of this season and then in the off-season, ask him if this is something he really want to do and stay active with, or if you should find someone else.

BTW, spodog, this then makes 5, right?
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


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


Return to Commissioner's Corner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 5:30 hours
(and 36 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


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