Need some input on legitimacy of trade

[mark32esu 18]

scenario: Team A is 4-4, Team B is 0-7-1

 

12 team ppr redraft league all with friends for the most part

 

First trade they tried to pull:

 

Team A gets

Hyde

Mccaffrey

M. Thomas

 

Team B gets:

Ty Montgomery

Cohen

Davonte Adams

 

Red flags went off, I shot it down and put it up to league vote, unanimously the league voted against it. I asked team B about it and he said he's out of it so he told team A to put anything through and he'll accept it.

 

After team A threw a fit, now he is trying to trade:

 

A gets:

Mccaffrey

M. thomas

 

B gets:

rishard matthews

tarik cohen

davonte adams

emmanuel sanders

 

Knowing the first trade was obvious collusion, this second trade appears team A is dumping his bench to cherry pick team B's best players. I am always lenient with trades and not often do we have to vote on them, but knowing they were colluding the first trade attempt, is this second one legitimate enough to put through without vote?

 

[bandrus1 413]

if it was just trade 2 I think it would be allowable... Knowing about the first situation I think team B should be barred from trading since he admitted to it

[TBayXXXVII 2,401]

It's not collusion. Team B told you that. He didn't care. That's a bad owner, but not collusion. Collusion is when you purposely try to help someone win. He didn't do that. Apathy and Collusion are not the same thing.

[Brutal Brutus 182]

It's the type of trade that ruins leagues.

[weepaws 3,022]

Have no problem with it.

[mark32esu 18]

It's the type of trade that ruins leagues.

 

I agree, this is the 12th year of the league and it's always smooth and good fun, the Team A guy always tries pulling something sketchy or has issues with nonsense stuff, he's a friend but I'd rather pisss off 1 owner than the rest of the league

[SexyRexy 60]

Since the guy basically admitted he was being a douche you should kick both out after the season. Both willfully took part in a trade that undermined integrity of the league. Its textbook collusion.

 

I had an identical scenario years ago, it turned into a war and I kicked both owners out after the season.

[brotherbock 349]

I honestly wouldn't have a problem with the second one, had it not been for the guy's admission that he's just giving away whatever. There's a reason commishes have the ability to lock team rosters. Whether or not the B owner is apathetic, it by admission is collusion--he is taking part in the attempt to benefit only one team in a trade. That's collusion. That he doesn't really care doesn't make it not collusion.

 

Had that first trade not come up and it was just the second with no admission, I don't know it's a terrible trade. Cohen, Adams, and Sanders have a chance to get some bulk opportunities in bad offenses, and McCaff isn't all that.

[seafoam1 2,569]

I usually dont want to interfere with any trades but that is crazy. I would restructure the league to benefit those for order of finish. Meaning all would rather finish in next to last place than on last place. And so one. Final finish for all teams, first to last, will mean fighting to the end. If you don't hsve this structure, no matter who you pull into the league, someone will crap out half way through the year.

[Phil Simms 11 133]

Do these people have functioning minds? Im out of it so I will just accept any trade?

 

How inconsiderate, with friends like that who needs enemies?

[BuschWack 59]

I honestly wouldn't have a problem with the second one, had it not been for the guy's admission that he's just giving away whatever. There's a reason commishes have the ability to lock team rosters. Whether or not the B owner is apathetic, it by admission is collusion--he is taking part in the attempt to benefit only one team in a trade. That's collusion. That he doesn't really care doesn't make it not collusion.

 

Had that first trade not come up and it was just the second with no admission, I don't know it's a terrible trade. Cohen, Adams, and Sanders have a chance to get some bulk opportunities in bad offenses, and McCaff isn't all that.

100%

[jgcrawfish 232]

I'm a big believer in a few things. The first is that I like weekly payouts for various positions. If a guy has a chance to $5 because of a WR bonus that week, he's a lot less likely to trade him away. Secondly, teams that are eliminated from making the playoffs can't make trades, period. I would guess that at 0-7 that's probably the case, no way to make it.

 

Long time ago I made a trade that my then-work league considered as shady. I traded away 4 guys to a team that was fading fast (but not eliminated from playoffs). I traded 2 RB's and 2 WR's to get back Jamaal Lewis and Randy Moss, both early draft picks on the guys roster. Both were hurt and were due back in a couple of weeks. The players I traded were both RB2's and both WR2's, but he had nothing and I was gambling on the hurt players returning and giving me a loaded roster....didn't happen. The owner who got my 4 players made a playoff run, I limped into the playoffs. Moss and Lewis never got healthy enough to make a difference and both of us got eliminated in the 1st round. Bottom line: NOBODY can predict the future and know how a trade turns out.

[tanatastic 2,062]

It’s tanking, admitted tanking. Teach team B the meaning of it and why it’s a no no and disallow him from making further trades.

[jimaveli 119]

Fantasy football is not really a good place for folks like that. If a team is having a bad season and doesnt want to keep on fighting, they should just play out the slate and then decide if they want to play again the next year or not. They shouldnt be trading badly on purpose. And they shouldnt be allowed to because that is pretty clearly collusion.

[neil2222 1]

Lock his roster and punch him in the face.

[BobSanders_33 127]

Its tanking, admitted tanking. Teach team B the meaning of it and why its a no no and disallow him from making further trades.

Agreed. I hate disallowing trades but if a player has given up and is OK with moving his players to help another team win it is collusion. The person that says it isn't is confused.

[tanatastic 2,062]

Agreed. I hate disallowing trades but if a player has given up and is OK with moving his players to help another team win it is collusion. The person that says it isn't is confused.

For some reason it’s common, even among people who,have played FF for a decade, to not understand seemingly basic concepts. They are not trying to be malicious, they just don’t know any better. It baffles me. Been with the same group for almost 15 years and people still don’t understand how waivers works, who and how playoffs are seeded etc. it’s baffling.

[brotherbock 349]

For some reason it’s common, even among people who,have played FF for a decade, to not understand seemingly basic concepts. They are not trying to be malicious, they just don’t know any better. It baffles me. Been with the same group for almost 15 years and people still don’t understand how waivers works, who and how playoffs are seeded etc. it’s baffling.

 

We forget things we don't use to make room for new information. During the offseason, they don't need that crap, so they forget. Like right now, I'm super slammed with work, lots of dates to remember, and it's like I jkeoers forgetesings sa hwo toiht epstoyopes thon eowerds ton my wkeynoaontrss and siubmitsn and post.

[Quickolas1 80]

I would advocate writing rules stating that neither 'collusion' nor 'apathy' will be tolerated.

Both terms have been in my league's rules for many years.

 

Team B owner isn't what you want in your league and should be politely be told to find a new hobby, one he cares about.

You are not being a bad friend... they are being bad (selfish, no integrity) friends.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,063]

We lock teams that have 7 loses from trades

[bandrus1 413]

I pay $35 a week to the highest scoring team. Every week somebody has something to play for..... Been the best system I have seen. My league runs great and never any trade issues

[Byrdman5 112]

Both arnt good. I would put the 2nd trade up for the league to vote.

My league has bonus week 9 team that wins by the largest margin and week 11 top scoring team. Then trading is not allowed after week 11, so no BS.

[tanatastic 2,062]

Lower your deadlines to week 7 or 8. Late deadlines only promote tanking.

[Ray_T 721]

scenario: Team A is 4-4, Team B is 0-7-1

 

12 team ppr redraft league all with friends for the most part

 

First trade they tried to pull:

 

Team A gets

Hyde

Mccaffrey

M. Thomas

 

Team B gets:

Ty Montgomery

Cohen

Davonte Adams

 

Red flags went off, I shot it down and put it up to league vote, unanimously the league voted against it. I asked team B about it and he said he's out of it so he told team A to put anything through and he'll accept it.

 

After team A threw a fit, now he is trying to trade:

 

A gets:

Mccaffrey

M. thomas

 

B gets:

rishard matthews

tarik cohen

davonte adams

emmanuel sanders

 

Knowing the first trade was obvious collusion, this second trade appears team A is dumping his bench to cherry pick team B's best players. I am always lenient with trades and not often do we have to vote on them, but knowing they were colluding the first trade attempt, is this second one legitimate enough to put through without vote?

 

what should have happened is team B should have had their roster frozen as penalty for the first stupid move.

 

then you wouldnt even have this situation.

[brotherbock 349]

what should have happened is team B should have had their roster frozen as penalty for the first stupid move.

 

then you wouldnt even have this situation.

 

[BTL99 34]

100% do not let that trade go thru. Team B is eliminated from the playoffs and should be banned from trading.

[brotherbock 349]

100% do not let that trade go thru. Team B is eliminated from the playoffs and should be banned from trading.

 

Yup. Only reason to not lock down trading for bottom teams is being in a keeper league. And even then, you could make a good case for a deadline.

[the newb 23]

Let owners run their teams. Period

[BTL99 34]

Let owners run their teams. Period

Yea if you are in a bullshit league no problem. But when you are in a serious league with money you can’t just “let owners run their teams”.

[seafoam1 2,569]

Yea if you are in a bullshit league no problem. But when you are in a serious league with money you cant just let owners run their teams.

If you are in a serious league the league setup has incentives for finishing in a better final position no matter what position that is. That will keep all teams involved for the whole season.

[tanatastic 2,062]

Let owners run their teams. Period

No thats just wrong. People deserve fair competition and people tanking compromises that. Admitted tanking should be punished by a veto and roster lock. Also his lineup needs to be manually set every week since he will likely be salty and/or stop caring enough to log in.

[vino 29]

It’s tanking, admitted tanking. Teach team B the meaning of it and why it’s a no no and disallow him from making further trades.

 

this ^^ . I'm rarely skeptical about trades But I would've thought trade 2 was a bit sketchy regardless. No team should be allowed to trade if they're tanking and if they are trying to trade, their trade has to absolutely be justified by the teams involved.

 

definitely let team B know how fkd up that is. I wouldn't trust his arse with a single trade after admitting to that and keep an eye out to make sure he doesn't tank games either.

[Ray_T 721]

Let owners run their teams. Period

no.

 

there are some people out there who only have fun when they are winning. If the dont win, they will screw things up for others. This guy has shown he cannot be trusted with the first deal. why let him do more dealings?

 

under normal circumstances the deal doesnt look like one I would normally veto, but it doesnt look good either.

 

and if hes done something stupid, and now hes pulling this, I think you need to shut it down.

 

it may be prudent to see how the rest of the league (excluding the 2 trade partners) feels just because you dont want a big fight.

 

but at this point if the guy leaves the league, he's probably doing all of you a favour. I'd strongly consider not inviting him to play fantasy football next year.

[DankNuggs 305]

Think you lock team B's roster once he admitted to tanking. I told my collusion story in another thread, but similar deal... Original deal called out, and commish reworked the deal deciding on the players in the trade to make it 'fair'...it wasn't close even after the tinkering and the whole thing smelled rotten. Big money on the line and the deal changed the competitive balance of the league.

 

I just ended up quitting the league

[jaxjag 43]

It's not collusion. Team B told you that. He didn't care. That's a bad owner, but not collusion. Collusion is when you purposely try to help someone win. He didn't do that. Apathy and Collusion are not the same thing.

 

And your point is ?

[jaxjag 43]

Lock his roster and punch him in the face.

 

We amputate a finger for each crappy trade accepted.