Commissioner Trade (1 Viewer)

[GOroute]

edited for: issue resolved, thanks for your input. have a great day!

 

[Crazy8s]

My Honest Opinion....What the He!! does the bye week have to do with this trade. Come on....guys are reaching.

 

[NYCGangGreen]

Bye Week or not....Boldin for Walker is a legit trade.

Boldin for Driver, even i would scoff at.....

I think someone is just trying to protect their lead so that they win the league...which is BS in my book.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

I don't see the issue. The trade is fine.

Just make sure that they don't trade back those players, because if thats the case, then they just borrowed players and THAT should not happen.

Only trades which are collusion should be vetoed, other than that...they are fine.

 

[SwampDawg]

As long as they don't trade players back at some other point I don't have an issue with it. Both are stud WRs and one could argue that Boldin has the better schedule left with Denver playing San Diego twice.

 

[GOroute]

no one is trying to protect their lead. that is the issue at hand. the co-commish is 7-1 and would only benefit by Team A winning (which he did because of this trade). Team B had no reason to make this trade as his wr's are all 4th wr's or worse. No one is questionning the fairness of the deal, instead they are questionning the timing of the deal. no one might not be colluding but Team B is clearly tanking last week by giving up his #1 wr by far. the trade is fair no question. but the timing is very unfair and very fishy.

-that statement above should help provide more insight on the deal.

 

[VIKEfan]

give me your honest insight into this fantasy fball issue...At about 1230 (before the 1pm games started). Team A & Team B make a trade. In this league there are no playoffs. After week 16, the team with the best record wins the league. Team A is 5-3 and Team B is 2-6. The 2 leaders are 7-1. Team A is in the main commissioner. Team B needs to win most of their remaining games in order to have a shot at the league. Team A gives Anquan Boldin for Javon Walker. Boldin has a bye that week where Walker does not.The trade goes to the co-commissioner who immediately challenges the trade thinking why would Team B do a deal to trade his best wr for a wr that is good but is on bye especially when they need every win they can get. Team A owner says the other commish that is challenging the trade is only upset because the Team A owner wouldnt trade Boldin for Driver although that would have been fair cause Driver did not have a bye that week. The other commish is one of the 7-1 teams and would have benefited from Team A beating the team Team A played that week as that other team is 6-2. So the other commish selfishly could say the trade is fair because it helps his team, but he decides on doing what is right in his opinion as opposed to helping himself.Team A wins the game because of this deal. A little luck from Walker, but a deal in question well before the 4pm game that Walker had.What is your honest opinion?

Honestly, after reading it a couple of times to try figue that novel out, it would be better to know what depth team A and B had at WR. 1st off could team B afford to sit Boldin for the week, in hopes of having a better performing WR from here on out.2ndly in our league Boldin was about even with Walker...before this weekend. I'm sure Walker is now leading most leagues after scoring almost 4 times as many points as most guys consistently put up.Lastly, because this trade went through BEFORE Walkers huge game, maybe Team B was thinking Boldin was going to have a better run down the stretch. Thinking that it would be worth sacrificing a weeks worth of points to have Boldin on his roster the rest of the way. Yeah, he might be kicking him self for giving up Walker 1 week to early, but this looks like a legit trade to me.

 

[VIKEfan]

no one is trying to protect their lead. that is the issue at hand. the co-commish is 7-1 and would only benefit by Team A winning (which he did because of this trade). Team B had no reason to make this trade as his wr's are all 4th wr's or worse. No one is questionning the fairness of the deal, instead they are questionning the timing of the deal. no one might not be colluding but Team B is clearly tanking last week by giving up his #1 wr by far. the trade is fair no question. but the timing is very unfair and very fishy.

-that statement above should help provide more insight on the deal.

Not really, giving up a #1 wr for possibly a little better #1 wr isn't uncalled for. It was stated more than once in the replies above. Boldin could likely out produce Walker the rest of the way. If I knew that, I'd trade a way a receiver to get one that will produce more. It probably took Walker to get Boldin. I doubt any of his "4th WR's" would have made the trade go through.

 

[tomdeck]

Agree, it is a fair enough trade. I see nothing wrong with the situation unless they try to trade back. Funny thing is after Walker's performance this week and Plummer having to throw more becuase of the Bells, Walker might be a better second half receiver than Boldin, depending on your scoring system.

 

[Warhogs]

no one is trying to protect their lead. that is the issue at hand. the co-commish is 7-1 and would only benefit by Team A winning (which he did because of this trade). Team B had no reason to make this trade as his wr's are all 4th wr's or worse. No one is questionning the fairness of the deal, instead they are questionning the timing of the deal. no one might not be colluding but Team B is clearly tanking last week by giving up his #1 wr by far. the trade is fair no question. but the timing is very unfair and very fishy.-that statement above should help provide more insight on the deal.

The value of the players is fair. The timing may be what allowed the trade to happen. Assanine to put scrutiny on this trade IMO. I'm glad I'm not in your league if this fair trade is coming into question.

 

[GOroute]

good question about wr depth. here they are post-trade:

team A:

J Walker

S Moss

R Brown

A Battle

R Wayne

team B:

M Jones

M Furrey

D Givens

A Boldin

A Lelie

D Mason

this is a big part of the deal. team b could not afford to lose a starting wr for that week. team b has an awful team overall and has no business throwing games away as it throws off the competitive balance.

R Smith

 

[pinequick]

no one is trying to protect their lead. that is the issue at hand. the co-commish is 7-1 and would only benefit by Team A winning (which he did because of this trade). Team B had no reason to make this trade as his wr's are all 4th wr's or worse. No one is questionning the fairness of the deal, instead they are questionning the timing of the deal. no one might not be colluding but Team B is clearly tanking last week by giving up his #1 wr by far. the trade is fair no question. but the timing is very unfair and very fishy.

-that statement above should help provide more insight on the deal.

Wow, I cannot believe that you are asking this question. The trade was completed before any games started. --So that is clearly fair.

What you're questioning is whether one owner could *really* be gambling that Anquan Boldin would out-produce Javon Walker over the last 8 weeks of your season, bye-week included. Otherwise, you think it's cheating.

--Given the way that Plummer has looked at times this season, I probably would have taken that bet before Week 9. Again, clearly a fair deal.

Ease up on the sour grapes, fella. You lost (or had your chances of winning this league, or whatever) fair and square.

I hate these collusion questions and I hardly ever respond since I don't think they belong in the Shark Pool--but this one is so dumb it simply required a response.

 

[my man otis]

If someone pays into a league they can do anything they want w/in the current rules framework.

If it's a legal trade then it's a non-issue. Address it in the offseason if possible.

 

[GOroute]

no one is trying to protect their lead. that is the issue at hand. the co-commish is 7-1 and would only benefit by Team A winning (which he did because of this trade). Team B had no reason to make this trade as his wr's are all 4th wr's or worse. No one is questionning the fairness of the deal, instead they are questionning the timing of the deal. no one might not be colluding but Team B is clearly tanking last week by giving up his #1 wr by far. the trade is fair no question. but the timing is very unfair and very fishy.

-that statement above should help provide more insight on the deal.

Wow, I cannot believe that you are asking this question. The trade was completed before any games started. --So that is clearly fair.

What you're questioning is whether one owner could *really* be gambling that Anquan Boldin would out-produce Javon Walker over the last 8 weeks of your season, bye-week included. Otherwise, you think it's cheating.

--Given the way that Plummer has looked at times this season, I probably would have taken that bet before Week 9. Again, clearly a fair deal.

Ease up on the sour grapes, fella. You lost (or had your chances of winning this league, or whatever) fair and square.

I hate these collusion questions and I hardly ever respond since I don't think they belong in the Shark Pool--but this one is so dumb it simply required a response.

honestly, i am NEITHER team in this situation. The question IS NOT who is better Boldin & Walker. Fantasy Football is a matter of opinion. Do you like LT or LJ, Manning or McNabb, Boldin or Walker. They are all within reason. The question is why would Team B trade for a wr on bye when he desperatley needs to win that week? He is showing the league that he is tanking the game. Again, many of you are misunderstanding the issue and that could be my fault from the original post, but again this is not a question of who is better walker or boldin. On any other week this trade is a nonissue. But when it is done right before the start of the games, the other commissioner questions it, the Team A Owner shows questionable defensiveness right away, and Team B looks to be tanking this week which is a must win for him- it is without a doubt going to be scrutinized. and rightfully so.

 

[videoguy505]

No trading in fantasy football, any effort to make your team better only hurts other teams and inherently isn't fair. Veto everything!

Oh, I mean, address it per your league rules. If the commish has veto power, then them's the breaks.

 

[thayman]

Did you ever stop and consider the fact that Walker has had 2 big games prior to last week. Perhaps the guy that traded for Boldin thought that Boldin on a bye=Walker playing. Maybe he likes Boldin this week forward. Why are you even scrutinizing this trade?

 

[Xenopax]

no one is trying to protect their lead. that is the issue at hand. the co-commish is 7-1 and would only benefit by Team A winning (which he did because of this trade). Team B had no reason to make this trade as his wr's are all 4th wr's or worse. No one is questionning the fairness of the deal, instead they are questionning the timing of the deal. no one might not be colluding but Team B is clearly tanking last week by giving up his #1 wr by far. the trade is fair no question. but the timing is very unfair and very fishy.-that statement above should help provide more insight on the deal.

Gee, a team tries to time their trade so it benefits them the most. That's just unheard of in fantasy football.

 

[DocGonzo]

"No playoffs?!? Are you kidding me?!? No playoffs?!?" (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

Seems like a fair deal to me. Just because some view the timing as questionable doesn't necessarily mean he "clearly" was tanking.

 

[sinatravolta]

I think the trade is fine.

And although Team A won this week, they may well lose in weeks to come because they have Walker instead of Boldin.

If you want to ask the 2-6 team what their motive was in the trade you can - and if it was just to help the 5-3 team then there's a problem. But if they figured it would make their team better overall and help Team A in their big game - then no worries.

 

[pinequick]

no one is trying to protect their lead. that is the issue at hand. the co-commish is 7-1 and would only benefit by Team A winning (which he did because of this trade). Team B had no reason to make this trade as his wr's are all 4th wr's or worse. No one is questionning the fairness of the deal, instead they are questionning the timing of the deal. no one might not be colluding but Team B is clearly tanking last week by giving up his #1 wr by far. the trade is fair no question. but the timing is very unfair and very fishy.

-that statement above should help provide more insight on the deal.

Wow, I cannot believe that you are asking this question. The trade was completed before any games started. --So that is clearly fair.

What you're questioning is whether one owner could *really* be gambling that Anquan Boldin would out-produce Javon Walker over the last 8 weeks of your season, bye-week included. Otherwise, you think it's cheating.

--Given the way that Plummer has looked at times this season, I probably would have taken that bet before Week 9. Again, clearly a fair deal.

Ease up on the sour grapes, fella. You lost (or had your chances of winning this league, or whatever) fair and square.

I hate these collusion questions and I hardly ever respond since I don't think they belong in the Shark Pool--but this one is so dumb it simply required a response.

honestly, i am NEITHER team in this situation. The question IS NOT who is better Boldin & Walker. Fantasy Football is a matter of opinion. Do you like LT or LJ, Manning or McNabb, Boldin or Walker. They are all within reason. The question is why would Team B trade for a wr on bye when he desperatley needs to win that week? He is showing the league that he is tanking the game. Again, many of you are misunderstanding the issue and that could be my fault from the original post, but again this is not a question of who is better walker or boldin. On any other week this trade is a nonissue. But when it is done right before the start of the games, the other commissioner questions it, the Team A Owner shows questionable defensiveness right away, and Team B looks to be tanking this week which is a must win for him- it is without a doubt going to be scrutinized. and rightfully so.

Look, don't come in here asking for others' opinions when you clearly have your mind already made up. And frankly, you're wrong.The long and the short of the validity of this trade boils down to whether it is conceivable that Owner B thought: "Will Anquan Boldin in 7 games outperform Javon Walker in 8 games?" If the answer is even conceivably "yes" (which, given Plummer's early-season woes, it clearly is), then he is making a trade to make his team better. Period. End of scrutiny.

You're looking at this with the benefit of hindsight. Had Walker put up another 4/75/0 like he did in Week 6, you wouldn't even be posting this question.

Based on the information available to Team B at the time of the trade, this deal could very well have worked out in his team's benefit--hence, a fair trade. If you can't see that, then you are too close to the situation to be objective.

And I don't doubt that you are NEITHER team in this situation. I'm guessing that you're the 6-2 team that got beat by Walker. . .

 

[Crusaderfan]

no one is trying to protect their lead. that is the issue at hand. the co-commish is 7-1 and would only benefit by Team A winning (which he did because of this trade). Team B had no reason to make this trade as his wr's are all 4th wr's or worse. No one is questionning the fairness of the deal, instead they are questionning the timing of the deal. no one might not be colluding but Team B is clearly tanking last week by giving up his #1 wr by far. the trade is fair no question. but the timing is very unfair and very fishy.-that statement above should help provide more insight on the deal.

I really don't need more insight. IMHO - Boldin is a notch above Walker as a WR. The difference between Boldin and Walker for the rest of the year is made smaller by the bye week being factored in. Would the guy that had Boldin trade him even up Walker if both were going to play the same amount of weeks going forward? Maybe if the SOS difference was significant. Maybe if he was a Broncos fan, etc.. But in many cases why would he do the trade?To me Boldin being on a bye probably made this deal happen. If you honestly feel that Team B tanked his game - don't invite him back next season. Not knowing the people involved I'm guessing that he felt his bench strength could get him through last weeks game then he would have a stronger team going forward.It's hard but I trust the guys I play with OR I find other people to play with the next season.Good LuckWillie

 

[GregR_2]

...

honestly, i am NEITHER team in this situation. The question IS NOT who is better Boldin & Walker. Fantasy Football is a matter of opinion. Do you like LT or LJ, Manning or McNabb, Boldin or Walker. They are all within reason. The question is why would Team B trade for a wr on bye when he desperatley needs to win that week? He is showing the league that he is tanking the game. Again, many of you are misunderstanding the issue and that could be my fault from the original post, but again this is not a question of who is better walker or boldin. On any other week this trade is a nonissue. But when it is done right before the start of the games, the other commissioner questions it, the Team A Owner shows questionable defensiveness right away, and Team B looks to be tanking this week which is a must win for him- it is without a doubt going to be scrutinized. and rightfully so.

Two things bother me about this thread. First, it has gone on for awhile now and unless I've missed it, there still hasn't been any mention of Owner B's answer to why he believes (believed) the trade makes his team better. That should have been the starting point for this whole process, and if the co-commish didn't do that at the start then he isn't doing his job. Second, I think the part I bolded above is short sighted. I think in his place I would be more concerned with placing as high as I could because I don't think I'd have a realistic shot at the championship. Given the team records you've mentioned, it is even possible he's numerically eliminated already if enough top teams have games remaining against each other. If not, he's probably very close to numerically eliminated.

If he thinks this move might get him 2 wins down the stretch that would have been losses, then he should do it even if it means a lessened chance to win the next week.

 

[TinHat]

sack up

it's fair and sqaure

 

[Slum Lord]

Boldin for Driver, even i would scoff at.....

You'd scoff at trading two wideouts with nearly identical receiving stats? How much more even does that have to be?Anyway, the trade seems fine to me.

 

[baronson]

bottom line: if you need to post in the shark pool to determine if something is collusion... it's not.

 

[ChromeWeasel]

give me your honest insight into this fantasy fball issue...At about 1230 (before the 1pm games started). Team A & Team B make a trade. In this league there are no playoffs. After week 16, the team with the best record wins the league. Team A is 5-3 and Team B is 2-6. The 2 leaders are 7-1. Team A is in the main commissioner. Team B needs to win most of their remaining games in order to have a shot at the league. Team A gives Anquan Boldin for Javon Walker. Boldin has a bye that week where Walker does not.The trade goes to the co-commissioner who immediately challenges the trade thinking why would Team B do a deal to trade his best wr for a wr that is good but is on bye especially when they need every win they can get. Team A owner says the other commish that is challenging the trade is only upset because the Team A owner wouldnt trade Boldin for Driver although that would have been fair cause Driver did not have a bye that week. The other commish is one of the 7-1 teams and would have benefited from Team A beating the team Team A played that week as that other team is 6-2. So the other commish selfishly could say the trade is fair because it helps his team, but he decides on doing what is right in his opinion as opposed to helping himself.Team A wins the game because of this deal. A little luck from Walker, but a deal in question well before the 4pm game that Walker had.What is your honest opinion?

It sounds like you and the co-commissioner are a couple of sissies. Try acting like men and letting other owners run their teams as they see fit. I'd like to see what rules these guys broke with their trade (which looks pretty even). If they didnt break any rules, what grounds does anyone have to challenge them on?You're league setup sounds like you should have an earlier trade deadline. Implement one next year so you dont have to worry about things like this. Or just eliminate all trades if you dont want to let your owners run their own teams.

 

[kensat30]

So the guy trades Anquan Boldin on Boldin's bye week for Javon Walker, right before the games for that week start.

So to summarize:

Guy who is still in it at 5-3

Instead of X starts Javon Walker (Boldin traded)

Guy who is out of it at 2-6

Instead of Walker now has to decide between scrubs (Boldin benched due to bye)

--

How can that trade be considered ethical? I mean c'mon, the guy replaces a bye week WR 30 minutes before opening kickoff on Sunday? The 2-6 team CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE if he has any chance of winning the league at all. So what does he do? Trades his by far best WR that week for a guy on a bye. That should send a clear signal that he is tanking the game (and thus his season). The 5-3 guy is desperate for a win, being two games back from the lead, and with his best WR on bye. He then conveniently trades his bye week WR for a guy that is playing that week. Clear case of collusion IMO. If the other team 2-6 team was not out of it, then I can see making this trade. But the way it stands now, clearly the 2-6 is tanking and thus collusion is apparent. If I was in that league I would be pissed.

 

[my man otis]

(1) Collusion and pure tanking are two different things. This may be the latter w/o being the former.

(2) GOroute - is the draft order in a subsequent year based at all on the previous year's finish?

AND (3) why did you "x" out your original text?

 

[pinequick]

(1) Collusion and pure tanking are two different things. This may be the latter w/o being the former.

(2) GOroute - is the draft order in a subsequent year based at all on the previous year's finish?



AND (3) why did you "x" out your original text?

Because he has begun posting as "kensat30"?

 

[GregR_2]

... The 2-6 team CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE if he has any chance of winning the league at all. So what does he do? Trades his by far best WR that week for a guy on a bye. That should send a clear signal that he is tanking the game (and thus his season). ...

Again, why do you make the assumption that winning the entire league is, or even should be, his goal given where he is. If I'm that team I'm probably focusing more on not finishing in last place than I am holding out for that 1 in a million chance that I could win the entire league.

 

[NYCGangGreen]

Boldin for Driver, even i would scoff at.....

You'd scoff at trading two wideouts with nearly identical receiving stats? How much more even does that have to be?Anyway, the trade seems fine to me.

I'm going by a Dynasty league.....Boldin holds much more value than Driver.

 

[pantagrapher]

(1) Collusion and pure tanking are two different things. This may be the latter w/o being the former.

(2) GOroute - is the draft order in a subsequent year based at all on the previous year's finish?



AND (3) why did you "x" out your original text?

Because he has begun posting as "kensat30"?

 

[Crazy8s]

This would'nt have been an issue if Walker didn't go off last week. That's another reason this thread bothers me....where were you the day it happened....or even on Monday.

Seriously, get over it. ( I'm saying this as nicely as i can)

 

[kensat30]

... The 2-6 team CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE if he has any chance of winning the league at all. So what does he do? Trades his by far best WR that week for a guy on a bye. That should send a clear signal that he is tanking the game (and thus his season). ...

Again, why do you make the assumption that winning the entire league is, or even should be, his goal given where he is. If I'm that team I'm probably focusing more on not finishing in last place than I am holding out for that 1 in a million chance that I could win the entire league.

Maybe it's just me, but I play to win. I play until I'm mathematically eliminated.And even then, it just seems way too convenient that the 2-6 guy who it looks like is tanking the week 9 matchup also greatly helps out the 5-3 guy who is on the verge of being another "1 in a million chance" of having best record against teams who hold a 2 game lead against him already. The timing of the trade (30 minutes before kickoff) could also point to these two teams knowing that they were pulling an unethical move, and that they wanted it done before a nasty protest could be brought up.Edit: I'm not the OP BTW.

 

[GOroute]

This would'nt have been an issue if Walker didn't go off last week. That's another reason this thread bothers me....where were you the day it happened....or even on Monday.Seriously, get over it. ( I'm saying this as nicely as i can)

actually the trade was called BS at 1pm. 3 hours before the Denver game started. SOOOO, your statement above is made to look silly. thx.2nd, i x'd out the original text because the posters on this board become so grumpy and 1 sided it isnt even funny. i asked this same question to other people and 9 out of 10 had an issue with it. this is more reason why i do the opposite of what many people on this board say. the so-called sharks- maybe those self-acclaimed are the people i beat yr in and yr out.

 

[Keg]

re-draft, dynasty or keeper league?

re-draft, imo the deal is fine

dynasty or keeper, imo people that are crying have no right considering that maybe the guy thinks that boldin is a better long term prospect considering that plummer could be replaced by cutler and there could be some growing pains...while leinart is learning now and next season they will probably be less hindered then a new combo like cutler/walker could be

 

[Keg]

This would'nt have been an issue if Walker didn't go off last week. That's another reason this thread bothers me....where were you the day it happened....or even on Monday.

Seriously, get over it. ( I'm saying this as nicely as i can)

actually the trade was called BS at 1pm. 3 hours before the Denver game started. SOOOO, your statement above is made to look silly. thx.2nd, i x'd out the original text because the posters on this board become so grumpy and 1 sided it isnt even funny. i asked this same question to other people and 9 out of 10 had an issue with it. this is more reason why i do the opposite of what many people on this board say. the so-called sharks- maybe those self-acclaimed are the people i beat yr in and yr out.

people tend to feel that way when others dont agree with their POV

 

[GOroute]

re-draft, dynasty or keeper league?re-draft, imo the deal is finedynasty or keeper, imo people that are crying have no right considering that maybe the guy thinks that boldin is a better long term prospect considering that plummer could be replaced by cutler and there could be some growing pains...while leinart is learning now and next season they will probably be less hindered then a new combo like cutler/walker could be

redraft

 

[apalmer]

So the guy trades Anquan Boldin on Boldin's bye week for Javon Walker, right before the games for that week start.So to summarize:Guy who is still in it at 5-3Instead of X starts Javon Walker (Boldin traded)Guy who is out of it at 2-6Instead of Walker now has to decide between scrubs (Boldin benched due to bye)--How can that trade be considered ethical? I mean c'mon, the guy replaces a bye week WR 30 minutes before opening kickoff on Sunday? The 2-6 team CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE if he has any chance of winning the league at all. So what does he do? Trades his by far best WR that week for a guy on a bye. That should send a clear signal that he is tanking the game (and thus his season). The 5-3 guy is desperate for a win, being two games back from the lead, and with his best WR on bye. He then conveniently trades his bye week WR for a guy that is playing that week. Clear case of collusion IMO. If the other team 2-6 team was not out of it, then I can see making this trade. But the way it stands now, clearly the 2-6 is tanking and thus collusion is apparent. If I was in that league I would be pissed.

OR it means he agrees with many others that Boldin is superior to Walker. He knows that if he waits a week, the deal won't go through because team A won't be desperate for a WR next week and won't give up Boldin for the inferior Walker. If he wants Boldin it's now or never. So, he has to make a choice: (a) have a weaker team this week (and hope he gets lucky with one of his other WR's) and then have a stronger team the rest of the season with Boldin, making him more likely to win those games; or (b) hang onto Walker and have a slightly better chance of winning this week but less of a chance of winning the rest of his games. I'd do the trade since I have a better chance to get lucky with a weaker lineup this 1 week than I do with a weaker lineup every week for the rest of the season--since he's 2-6 so far, his lineup with Walker sure isn't setting the world on fire, so why would anyone think he could stand pat and suddenly win the rest of his games? Taking a gamble is the only way to have a chance.

 

[GOroute]

(1) Collusion and pure tanking are two different things. This may be the latter w/o being the former.

(2) GOroute - is the draft order in a subsequent year based at all on the previous year's finish?

AND (3) why did you "x" out your original text?

to answer question 2, no the finish this yr has nothing to do with the draft next yr. this is a redraft lg.

 

[GOroute]

So the guy trades Anquan Boldin on Boldin's bye week for Javon Walker, right before the games for that week start.So to summarize:Guy who is still in it at 5-3Instead of X starts Javon Walker (Boldin traded)Guy who is out of it at 2-6Instead of Walker now has to decide between scrubs (Boldin benched due to bye)--How can that trade be considered ethical? I mean c'mon, the guy replaces a bye week WR 30 minutes before opening kickoff on Sunday? The 2-6 team CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE if he has any chance of winning the league at all. So what does he do? Trades his by far best WR that week for a guy on a bye. That should send a clear signal that he is tanking the game (and thus his season). The 5-3 guy is desperate for a win, being two games back from the lead, and with his best WR on bye. He then conveniently trades his bye week WR for a guy that is playing that week. Clear case of collusion IMO. If the other team 2-6 team was not out of it, then I can see making this trade. But the way it stands now, clearly the 2-6 is tanking and thus collusion is apparent. If I was in that league I would be pissed.

OR it means he agrees with many others that Boldin is superior to Walker. He knows that if he waits a week, the deal won't go through because team A won't be desperate for a WR next week and won't give up Boldin for the inferior Walker. If he wants Boldin it's now or never. So, he has to make a choice: (a) have a weaker team this week (and hope he gets lucky with one of his other WR's) and then have a stronger team the rest of the season with Boldin, making him more likely to win those games; or (b) hang onto Walker and have a slightly better chance of winning this week but less of a chance of winning the rest of his games. I'd do the trade since I have a better chance to get lucky with a weaker lineup this 1 week than I do with a weaker lineup every week for the rest of the season--since he's 2-6 so far, his lineup with Walker sure isn't setting the world on fire, so why would anyone think he could stand pat and suddenly win the rest of his games? Taking a gamble is the only way to have a chance.

you make the best case for the 2-6 team, by far. everyone else is just getting angry and making bad pts, but you make a good one. not that that is what the other owner was thinking, but good pt nonetheless.

 

[pantagrapher]

This would'nt have been an issue if Walker didn't go off last week. That's another reason this thread bothers me....where were you the day it happened....or even on Monday.

Seriously, get over it. ( I'm saying this as nicely as i can)

actually the trade was called BS at 1pm. 3 hours before the Denver game started. SOOOO, your statement above is made to look silly. thx.2nd, i x'd out the original text because the posters on this board become so grumpy and 1 sided it isnt even funny. i asked this same question to other people and 9 out of 10 had an issue with it. this is more reason why i do the opposite of what many people on this board say. the so-called sharks- maybe those self-acclaimed are the people i beat yr in and yr out.

Wow. Thanks for throwing the opinions you asked for back in everyone's face.What kind of league allows trades to go through during games, anyway?

 

[geoff8695]

This would'nt have been an issue if Walker didn't go off last week. That's another reason this thread bothers me....where were you the day it happened....or even on Monday.

Seriously, get over it. ( I'm saying this as nicely as i can)

actually the trade was called BS at 1pm. 3 hours before the Denver game started. SOOOO, your statement above is made to look silly. thx.2nd, i x'd out the original text because the posters on this board become so grumpy and 1 sided it isnt even funny. i asked this same question to other people and 9 out of 10 had an issue with it. this is more reason why i do the opposite of what many people on this board say. the so-called sharks- maybe those self-acclaimed are the people i beat yr in and yr out.

If you seriously came here seeking advice then I 'advise' you to not those who don't agree with you. Also, If you seriously expect everyone else to run their teams in the same manner as you run yours - then I suggest you stop playing fantasy football. You really don't have a leg to stand on in this argument unless you have a confession from both teams that they were 'colluding' and Team A is giving Team B $$. Otherwise, it's not for you to decide what their motives are when they make a trade that is fair - regardless of bye weeks. Also, many trades are made on Sunday mornings and some of them may seem impulsive to you, but that doesn't make them 'clear cut' collusion. Finally if you find 9 out of 10 people who think exactly as you do in this instance, then maybe you should go off and start a new 10 team league with them next year.

Maybe one of your 1st league rules can be that teams with losing records aren't allowed to trade because there is a possibility that it will piss off the teams with winning records and 'throw off the competitive balance'.

 

[Foosball God]

no one is trying to protect their lead. that is the issue at hand. the co-commish is 7-1 and would only benefit by Team A winning (which he did because of this trade). Team B had no reason to make this trade as his wr's are all 4th wr's or worse. No one is questionning the fairness of the deal, instead they are questionning the timing of the deal. no one might not be colluding but Team B is clearly tanking last week by giving up his #1 wr by far. the trade is fair no question. but the timing is very unfair and very fishy.

-that statement above should help provide more insight on the deal.

Wow, I cannot believe that you are asking this question. The trade was completed before any games started. --So that is clearly fair.

What you're questioning is whether one owner could *really* be gambling that Anquan Boldin would out-produce Javon Walker over the last 8 weeks of your season, bye-week included. Otherwise, you think it's cheating.

--Given the way that Plummer has looked at times this season, I probably would have taken that bet before Week 9. Again, clearly a fair deal.

Ease up on the sour grapes, fella. You lost (or had your chances of winning this league, or whatever) fair and square.

I hate these collusion questions and I hardly ever respond since I don't think they belong in the Shark Pool--but this one is so dumb it simply required a response.

honestly, i am NEITHER team in this situation. The question IS NOT who is better Boldin & Walker. Fantasy Football is a matter of opinion. Do you like LT or LJ, Manning or McNabb, Boldin or Walker. They are all within reason. The question is why would Team B trade for a wr on bye when he desperatley needs to win that week? He is showing the league that he is tanking the game. Again, many of you are misunderstanding the issue and that could be my fault from the original post, but again this is not a question of who is better walker or boldin. On any other week this trade is a nonissue. But when it is done right before the start of the games, the other commissioner questions it, the Team A Owner shows questionable defensiveness right away, and Team B looks to be tanking this week which is a must win for him- it is without a doubt going to be scrutinized. and rightfully so.

No he's not.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Ugh. Another one of these?

THE TRADE IS FINE.

If Team B thinks he's getting the better WR for the rest of the season and wants to roll the dice for this week to get the better WR, that's HIS DECISION.

 

[Pnishthm]

So the guy trades Anquan Boldin on Boldin's bye week for Javon Walker, right before the games for that week start.So to summarize:Guy who is still in it at 5-3Instead of X starts Javon Walker (Boldin traded)Guy who is out of it at 2-6Instead of Walker now has to decide between scrubs (Boldin benched due to bye)--How can that trade be considered ethical? I mean c'mon, the guy replaces a bye week WR 30 minutes before opening kickoff on Sunday? The 2-6 team CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE if he has any chance of winning the league at all. So what does he do? Trades his by far best WR that week for a guy on a bye. That should send a clear signal that he is tanking the game (and thus his season). The 5-3 guy is desperate for a win, being two games back from the lead, and with his best WR on bye. He then conveniently trades his bye week WR for a guy that is playing that week. Clear case of collusion IMO. If the other team 2-6 team was not out of it, then I can see making this trade. But the way it stands now, clearly the 2-6 is tanking and thus collusion is apparent. If I was in that league I would be pissed.

OR it means he agrees with many others that Boldin is superior to Walker. He knows that if he waits a week, the deal won't go through because team A won't be desperate for a WR next week and won't give up Boldin for the inferior Walker. If he wants Boldin it's now or never. So, he has to make a choice: (a) have a weaker team this week (and hope he gets lucky with one of his other WR's) and then have a stronger team the rest of the season with Boldin, making him more likely to win those games; or (b) hang onto Walker and have a slightly better chance of winning this week but less of a chance of winning the rest of his games. I'd do the trade since I have a better chance to get lucky with a weaker lineup this 1 week than I do with a weaker lineup every week for the rest of the season--since he's 2-6 so far, his lineup with Walker sure isn't setting the world on fire, so why would anyone think he could stand pat and suddenly win the rest of his games? Taking a gamble is the only way to have a chance.

you make the best case for the 2-6 team, by far. everyone else is just getting angry and making bad pts, but you make a good one. not that that is what the other owner was thinking, but good pt nonetheless.

Why are they making bad pts? Because they are different from yours? I never understood why guys post on here wanting opinions and when those opinions aren't the same as theirs they get all defensive.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Also - the fact that Team A was the commissioner is completely irrelevant.

Obviously you came here to post with a pre-determined opinion of it and looking for support. The general consensus here is that you're wrong and making an issue out of nothing; there's no need to get defensive and/or lash out at people because they don't agree with you.

 

[Phurfur]

My honest opinion is that your league sucks. I would not play in it.

 

[my man otis]

(1) Collusion and pure tanking are two different things. This may be the latter w/o being the former.

(2) GOroute - is the draft order in a subsequent year based at all on the previous year's finish?

AND (3) why did you "x" out your original text?

to answer question 2, no the finish this yr has nothing to do with the draft next yr. this is a redraft lg.

dunno then. seems weird but it is what it is.what did the guy say as reason he traded for boldin?

sorry if i missed it but i haven't seen that posted.

key to the whole thing IMO.

is he the brother of the guy he traded with? sworn enemies?

 

[GOroute]

My honest opinion is that your league sucks. I would not play in it.

i agree. this isnt my main league. i am not commish and am not affected by this, but i have an issue with it and wanted to get people's opinions on it- outside of my world. thanks for your answers- case closed.