DUMP TRADES (1 Viewer)

[Wrigley]

I am the commish of a 12 team roto keeper league.

$18 worth of keepers each year, with a $2 bump each year a player is kept

One owner has made several big named trades the last three days(these are just from today)

11th placed team trades with the 5th place team

Hanley(7) for Dye(4) A-Ram(4) and Josh Johnson(3)

11th placed team trades with 7th place team

Quinten(3), Bailey(1) Sheffield(1) gave M Young(3) Ludwick(3) Greg(2)

Trading with the 6th place team

Floyd(3) Mazzero(1) for Rollins(5)

These are all just from this morning

Now, I'll admit, there my be some sour grapes involved here, but one owner is dictating how the league will play out from the bottom of the standings.

How does your league view dump trades?

 

[pantagrapher]

We have a competitive-bidding process for all trades. After two teams agree to a trade, that trade goes into holding for three days and any other teams can make offers to either of the two teams involved. (And it happens all the time: I was in second place down the stretch last year and the first-place team swooped in and outbid me on a crucial trade with a rebuilding team.)

Next year's draft position is also based in part on second half performance, in an attempt to dissuade teams from all-out firesales.

We also assign points to players based on their draft position and keeper eligibility (all keeper eligible players can be kept for three years after the year they are drafted). All teams must maintain a certain number of points on their roster. Obviously, even this system can be gamed, but it's worked for five years and counting.

 

[Oh Yes!]

We have a competitive-bidding process for all trades. After two teams agree to a trade, that trade goes into holding for three days and any other teams can make offers to either of the two teams involved. (And it happens all the time: I was in second place down the stretch last year and the first-place team swooped in and outbid me on a crucial trade with a rebuilding team.)

i like this.

 

[Wrigley]

We have a competitive-bidding process for all trades. After two teams agree to a trade, that trade goes into holding for three days and any other teams can make offers to either of the two teams involved. (And it happens all the time: I was in second place down the stretch last year and the first-place team swooped in and outbid me on a crucial trade with a rebuilding team.) Next year's draft position is also based in part on second half performance, in an attempt to dissuade teams from all-out firesales. We also assign points to players based on their draft position and keeper eligibility (all keeper eligible players can be kept for three years after the year they are drafted). All teams must maintain a certain number of points on their roster. Obviously, even this system can be gamed, but it's worked for five years and counting.

I really like the bidding process.Tell me more about how the second half performance dissuades owners from holding the all-out firesale?

 

[Oh Yes!]

We have a competitive-bidding process for all trades. After two teams agree to a trade, that trade goes into holding for three days and any other teams can make offers to either of the two teams involved. (And it happens all the time: I was in second place down the stretch last year and the first-place team swooped in and outbid me on a crucial trade with a rebuilding team.) Next year's draft position is also based in part on second half performance, in an attempt to dissuade teams from all-out firesales. We also assign points to players based on their draft position and keeper eligibility (all keeper eligible players can be kept for three years after the year they are drafted). All teams must maintain a certain number of points on their roster. Obviously, even this system can be gamed, but it's worked for five years and counting.

I really like the bidding process.Tell me more about how the second half performance dissuades owners from holding the all-out firesale?

i dont see the problem with trying to get better keepers for the following year... if it involves an all-out fire sale then so be it.

 

[Wrigley]

We have a competitive-bidding process for all trades. After two teams agree to a trade, that trade goes into holding for three days and any other teams can make offers to either of the two teams involved. (And it happens all the time: I was in second place down the stretch last year and the first-place team swooped in and outbid me on a crucial trade with a rebuilding team.) Next year's draft position is also based in part on second half performance, in an attempt to dissuade teams from all-out firesales. We also assign points to players based on their draft position and keeper eligibility (all keeper eligible players can be kept for three years after the year they are drafted). All teams must maintain a certain number of points on their roster. Obviously, even this system can be gamed, but it's worked for five years and counting.

I really like the bidding process.Tell me more about how the second half performance dissuades owners from holding the all-out firesale?

i dont see the problem with trying to get better keepers for the following year... if it involves an all-out fire sale then so be it.

There is nothing wrong with this, but I think you're kind of missing the pointThey have some kind of built in reason not to dump your whole team.

 

[Oh Yes!]

We have a competitive-bidding process for all trades. After two teams agree to a trade, that trade goes into holding for three days and any other teams can make offers to either of the two teams involved. (And it happens all the time: I was in second place down the stretch last year and the first-place team swooped in and outbid me on a crucial trade with a rebuilding team.) Next year's draft position is also based in part on second half performance, in an attempt to dissuade teams from all-out firesales. We also assign points to players based on their draft position and keeper eligibility (all keeper eligible players can be kept for three years after the year they are drafted). All teams must maintain a certain number of points on their roster. Obviously, even this system can be gamed, but it's worked for five years and counting.

I really like the bidding process.Tell me more about how the second half performance dissuades owners from holding the all-out firesale?

i dont see the problem with trying to get better keepers for the following year... if it involves an all-out fire sale then so be it.

There is nothing wrong with this, but I think you're kind of missing the pointThey have some kind of built in reason not to dump your whole team.

an all out dump trade would be collusion wouldnt it?

 

[Wrigley]

We have a competitive-bidding process for all trades. After two teams agree to a trade, that trade goes into holding for three days and any other teams can make offers to either of the two teams involved. (And it happens all the time: I was in second place down the stretch last year and the first-place team swooped in and outbid me on a crucial trade with a rebuilding team.) Next year's draft position is also based in part on second half performance, in an attempt to dissuade teams from all-out firesales. We also assign points to players based on their draft position and keeper eligibility (all keeper eligible players can be kept for three years after the year they are drafted). All teams must maintain a certain number of points on their roster. Obviously, even this system can be gamed, but it's worked for five years and counting.

I really like the bidding process.Tell me more about how the second half performance dissuades owners from holding the all-out firesale?

i dont see the problem with trying to get better keepers for the following year... if it involves an all-out fire sale then so be it.

There is nothing wrong with this, but I think you're kind of missing the pointThey have some kind of built in reason not to dump your whole team.

an all out dump trade would be collusion wouldnt it?

semantics

 

[Captain Hook]

"Rebuilding trades" (I hate the other term) are an inherent part of keeper leagues. If you don't like them then stick to redraft leagues without any trades.

BUT as others have suggested there are several way to keep teams as competitive as possible and promote competion all year long, as well as having rules that make sure some degree of sanity is involved.

1) Second half bonus - my leagues pays $260 to the team that gains the most standing points in the second half of the season but is out of the paying positions.

2) Minor league draft order for the following year - if you are going to have a keeper league you might as well incorporate a "farm system" into the league. VERY easy to do; adds to the prize pool (we pay $5 for each retained minor leaguer); and helps balance some of the rebuilding trades. Next season's positions in the minor league draft will be determined by order of finish THIS year, starting with the first team out of the money - so in a twelve team league, the order for the first round of the minor league draft (serpentine draft) would be

5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-4-3-2-1 where the top four teams cash, so the fifth place team has the consolation of the most valuable pick of the minor leaguers next spirng. In addition to keeping everyone at the bottom trying to move up or maintain their place, this adds to the knowledge and fun of everyone in the league as it behooves them to know the minor leaguers and upcoming draft eligible players.

3) Have an early trade deadline - we use the first weekend in August, so there are at least two months without any further influence on the standings by later trades.

Those and other things can help, but again in keeper leagues, you are going to have the pennant races influenced to some degree by some of the trades - but everyone knows this and you constantly build up you "farm system" so you have the war chest to go out and make a trade when you are in contention for the Chamionship.

 

[dparker713]

I am the commish of a 12 team roto keeper league.

$18 worth of keepers each year, with a $2 bump each year a player is kept

One owner has made several big named trades the last three days(these are just from today)

11th placed team trades with the 5th place team

Hanley(7) for Dye(4) A-Ram(4) and Josh Johnson(3)

11th placed team trades with 7th place team

Quinten(3), Bailey(1) Sheffield(1) gave M Young(3) Ludwick(3) Greg(2)

Trading with the 6th place team

Floyd(3) Mazzero(1) for Rollins(5)

These are all just from this morning

Now, I'll admit, there my be some sour grapes involved here, but one owner is dictating how the league will play out from the bottom of the standings.

How does your league view dump trades?

The 11th place owner is still trying to win, just not this year. As long as a person gave this year a legit shot, I see zero reason to be concerned. Sounds like a good owner to me.

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

I am just pissed because dump trades never get done in my league. Our league allows theoretically 29 keepers per team (but each guy you keep must be kept at a coast of 3 rounds higher the next year...hence the top 3 guys can't be kept). To me, if I am out of realistic contention by around the All-Star break, I am offering my top 3 guys (who i can't keep anyway) for the best combination of next years draft picks/prospects.

At the same time if I am winning, I am hanging on to those high draft players a little longer - but eventually dumping htem in September to mid-tier teams for a foundation for the following year.

I love dynasty building, so I would never argue against a non-collusive dump trade.