Collusion? (1 Viewer)

[gonzobill5]

I'm in a redraft ppr league with some co-workers where the commish has veto power and isn't afraid to use it. This thread is NOT about whether or not a league should be set up that way.

Yesterday, the last place team traded Fitz to a contending team for Mike Wallace, Kolby Smith, & Chris Chambers. I think to myself, awful deal, dude should have accepted my offer of Addai and Steve Smith (Carolina) two weeks ago. It was rejected without a counter. Next thing I know it gets vetoed. So I see an opportunity and offer Mendenhall & MSW for Fitz. Again rejected without a counter. This morning I see that he trades Fitz to the same owner for Reggie Bush, Kolby Smith, & Kevin Walter. This one hasn't been vetoed.

I'm looking for a second opinion - does it look fishy that this owner keeps trying to trade the 3rd ranked player in our league for spare parts? Is it just sour grapes on my part that I didn't stand to benefit?

If this is assistant coach stuff, please move.

 

[tosberg34]

I'm in a redraft ppr league with some co-workers where the commish has veto power and isn't afraid to use it. This thread is NOT about whether or not a league should be set up that way. Yesterday, the last place team traded Fitz to a contending team for Mike Wallace, Kolby Smith, & Chris Chambers. I think to myself, awful deal, dude should have accepted my offer of Addai and Steve Smith (Carolina) two weeks ago. It was rejected without a counter. Next thing I know it gets vetoed. So I see an opportunity and offer Mendenhall & MSW for Fitz. Again rejected without a counter. This morning I see that he trades Fitz to the same owner for Reggie Bush, Kolby Smith, & Kevin Walter. This one hasn't been vetoed.I'm looking for a second opinion - does it look fishy that this owner keeps trying to trade the 3rd ranked player in our league for spare parts? Is it just sour grapes on my part that I didn't stand to benefit? If this is assistant coach stuff, please move.

Well, it certainly sounds fishy. The fact that he has now turned down 2 better offers for 2 completely useless ones tells me that maybe something is afoot between the two owners. I know there are lots of people on these boards that say no one should have any say in trades if they can't prove collusion but the least that could be done here is a little probing by the commish to find out reasons why a) 2 better offers were turned down and b) the reason behind the trade. Still, it looks fishy to me.

 

[BigDave]

If the last place team is mathematically out of it YES!!!!

My issue: My last place guy has a team and he also has a "neighbor" who has been in the league for the second year now.

"Neighbor"'s team drops Calvin Johnson last week. Last place team picks up Calvin as he has first waiver priority.

We think Same owner has two teams and is moving a good player from one to the other by manipulating the system.

Only solice is that he is in LAST! Playing the spoiler from here on out.

You can never underestimate how low a fellow FF owner will go.

 

[Knobs]

It's certainly fishy but nothing that can't be explained. The commish should probably ask a couple questions but really I don't see what can be done.

I would think twice about inviting this owner back next year.

I don't know why the commish would reject the first and not the second.

 

[Black]

Last place team with nothing to play for has no reason to be trading in redraft.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Last place team with nothing to play for has no reason to be trading in redraft.

unless weekly prizes (top scorer etc, low score punished etc)

 

[thatguy]

I'm in a redraft ppr league with some co-workers where the commish has veto power and isn't afraid to use it. This thread is NOT about whether or not a league should be set up that way. Yesterday, the last place team traded Fitz to a contending team for Mike Wallace, Kolby Smith, & Chris Chambers. I think to myself, awful deal, dude should have accepted my offer of Addai and Steve Smith (Carolina) two weeks ago. It was rejected without a counter. Next thing I know it gets vetoed. So I see an opportunity and offer Mendenhall & MSW for Fitz. Again rejected without a counter. This morning I see that he trades Fitz to the same owner for Reggie Bush, Kolby Smith, & Kevin Walter. This one hasn't been vetoed.I'm looking for a second opinion - does it look fishy that this owner keeps trying to trade the 3rd ranked player in our league for spare parts? Is it just sour grapes on my part that I didn't stand to benefit? If this is assistant coach stuff, please move.

Well, it certainly sounds fishy. The fact that he has now turned down 2 better offers for 2 completely useless ones tells me that maybe something is afoot between the two owners. I know there are lots of people on these boards that say no one should have any say in trades if they can't prove collusion but the least that could be done here is a little probing by the commish to find out reasons why a) 2 better offers were turned down and b) the reason behind the trade. Still, it looks fishy to me.

This.

 

[madd futher]

Same scenario as yesterday. sAME ANSWER.

I completely disagree with the above poster who said:

QUOTE (Black @ Nov 18 2009, 07:40 PM)

"Last place team with nothing to play for has no reason to be trading in redraft."

The last place team has EVERY RIGHT to make trades UNLESS you have rules in writing prohibiting this.

This same issue was posted in a slightly different scenario yesterday, and I suspect tht we will see about one of these a day for awhile.

Here's two comments to YESTERDAY'S post on the EXACT same problem:

QUOTE From Feeling MN: "Maybe this could serve as a catalyst to change your trade deadline next year. Make it a week or two earlier and you won't have to deal with this situation again."

My own comment from yesterday allso applies to your situation: "I am also a proponent of having an early league trading deadline, like the 1st week of Nov. It eliminates this type of scenario.

As long as you allow teams that are virtually out of contention to trade, those teams still DO have every right to try to improve their teams. NOBODY wants to come in dead last, and those owners usually are willing to take chances (and therefore make trades) in hopes for any chance to avoid last place."

SORRY, YOU GET NO HELP FROM ME - CHANGE YOUR LEAGUE RULES THIS OFF-SEASON.

 

[Mr. Mojo]

It smells like a tuna boat at low tide.

 

[No Way Jose]

If the last place team is mathematically out of it YES!!!!My issue: My last place guy has a team and he also has a "neighbor" who has been in the league for the second year now."Neighbor"'s team drops Calvin Johnson last week. Last place team picks up Calvin as he has first waiver priority. We think Same owner has two teams and is moving a good player from one to the other by manipulating the system. Only solice is that he is in LAST! Playing the spoiler from here on out. You can never underestimate how low a fellow FF owner will go.

Is the last place guy and his "neighbor" ever on at the same time? My MFL leagues let you know when someone is logged on. Sounds shady, but if it was not a Keeper league I don't really see the point, if he is in last place.

 

[gonzobill5]

Last place team with nothing to play for has no reason to be trading in redraft.

Thanks for the replies. He's 3-7 and not mathematically eliminated. He has every right to make trades - and I can see where trading his best player for depth might be advantageous to him. I don't really like an early trade deadline, as late season injuries (like we saw last week) change the playoff dynamic in a hurry. I just found the whole scenario fishy and wasn't sure if my judgment was clouded by my rejected offers. I appreciate the help!