I'm commish of a 12-team salary cap dynasty league that has been going steady for 20 years. We've had ups and downs and controversies and I've handled them all to the best of my ability and everyone has stuck around, either thanks to my integrity or the money ;-), but I'm looking for a little advice on this one, as both myself AND the assistant commissioner are possibly affected by the outcome and I want to get it right.
Our playoffs are played in two rounds of two-week series. So each team in each bracket plays their opponent in week 14 and week 15 with cumulative high scores advancing to a week 16 and week 17 cumulative score championship.
We run one waiver period between series (between week 15 and 16) but encourage trading throughout - helps maximize the value of any bottom teams' players for playoff teams in a pinch.
I and the assistant commissioner are both in the championship playoff against different opponents. My opponent brings a 30pt lead into this coming week but just learned he's lost Wentz and has no viable backup (foolish on his part, but it's a risk some team owners take). His only option is/was to trade for someone. Anyone trading with him would basically have him against the ropes as he would be desperate to protect his very good chance at advancing.
This trade just went down: my opponent traded Wentz (QB18) and two 2019 3rds for Luck (QB3) and a 5th... to his brother-in-law. I was willing to let it pass, even though it seems as though the owner getting Luck WAY underpaid, but my assistant commish feels pretty adamant that this is questionable enough that something should be done. He's convinced me to at least raise the question to see if anyone else thinks this is so out of whack that it's worth crying collusion and possibly damaging relationships over.
The additional complication is that I feel I'm too close to the situation to make a ruling, but so is the assistant commish, as he is likely to face that team in the championship if this trade stands, which would absolutely make the "Luck Team" favored.
I proposed that I nominate a 3-owner panel to rule on the situation, which is unprecedented (in 20 years we've never voted on trades and I've never overturned a trade), but I feel like if there's truly a concern here, it needs to be examined fairly by someone other than myself or the assistant. Before I even go that far, I'd love your opinions on whether or not this trade is so far off that it justifies any action.
Thanks in advance!