its not the leagues fault you do not have a backup QB
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
[DYNASTY] Firesales (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter EBF
- Start date
of the professional sports....footbal is most certainly not like you described....the others are....football is not
nobody is argueing moving veterans for picks...its the time of the deal....not the strategy itself
Miscellaneous
Footballguy
I think forbidding a team owner from executing a strategy that will ultimately win him more games through the course of his involvement in the league is ridiculous.As an owner, if I'm given a choice between 7-6, 5-8, 7-6 and 5-8, 9-4, 11-2... how can you tell me I'm wrong for choosing the second? I should be kept from winning the league in 2007 because you want me to win an extra game or two this year?ETA: I'm more against teams mortgaging their future for the current season - a team that trades their #1 picks the next three years for Holmes, Martin, and Rod Smith is going to draw my ire much quicker than a team who decides Ronnie Brown is worth more to them than Priest.
Last edited by a moderator:
nightshift
Footballguy
Sammy, You play is not a good example. First, if a team has 4 starting QBs and trade one, how is that tanking? Actually, this trade improves the competition. It's a win for the teams and the league.
Now, if owner 2 had only 1 starting QB and traded him for draft picks, that would be tanking. He CHOSE not to have a starting QB. Owner 1 lost his, presumably not by choice.
Best interest of the league should be first. No league, no play.
comparing trades in the NFL and the timing of those trades and trades in MLB ridicualous....however I knew somebody would try to compare the two....which is a waste of time....the factor here that is most disturbing is the fact that these trades are taking place after teams have been eliminated.....a team could work it's butt off all year.....and then get beat in the final weeks by a team who was able to aquire impact players because he was the first one to the firesale.....how fun is that....the idea behind dynasty leagues is to actually be more like the NFL than regular redraft leagues....late trades like the ones described NEVER happen in the NFL....they just don't.....if I am wrong someone please tell me the last time an impact player was traded late in the season to another team....????....so by allowing these trades you are actually making your dynasty league and the yearly outcomes in your league very different than the NFL....not more like it....#### we hardly ever see actual trades during any part of the season....let alone right before the playoffs......eta: got distarcted a few times while posting...left out a few words...
Last edited by a moderator:
SammyJankis
Footballguy
I mentioned this upthread, but again my point is, the early tradeline prevents all trades, not just fire sale trades. How do you draw the line to differentiate between the two?
it is the ethical part and timing of the strategy that I have a problem with....not the strategy itself...it is a good strategy but one that should not be allowed to be implemented late in the year....all league owners owe it to the league to have the current season shake out as it should.....late trades involving impact players for future picks have too much of an impact on the current season....granted a dynasty team needs to look toward the future....but really they should be doing that before or after the season if the league wants to have an NFL type league...
if you know the early trade deadline is approaching and you only have one QB....you might want to do something....make a trade...pick up a free agent....get your injured guys backup on your roster.....?....one of those might work..
the idea behind dynasty leagues is to actually be more like the NFL than regular redraft leagues....late trades like the ones described NEVER happen in the NFL....they just don't.....if I am wrong someone please tell me the last time an impact player was traded late in the season to another team....????....so by allowing these trades you are actually making your dynasty league and the yearly outcomes in your league very different than the NFL....not more like it....#### we hardly ever see actual trades during any part of the season....let alone right before the playoffs......
SammyJankis
Footballguy
I find the idea that everyone can build up enough depth at all positions to never need to trade after week 6 comical. In 2002, I had McNabb and Maddox as my QBs and was the top team in my league. In the course of one afternoon, McNabb was knocked out for the season and Maddox nearly had his career ended. McNabb was the #1 QB at the time in our scoring system and Maddox was one of the hottest QBs after taking over for Kordell. The bottom line is that I was able to trade for Brad Johnson, and I would have dead in the water under your early trade deadline rules.
In a 16 team, start 2 RB league, I had incredible depth last year with Jamal Lewis, Ricky Williams, Kevin Jones, Chris Brown and Lee Suggs on my team. Unfortunately Ricky retired, Jamal sprained his ankle, Kevin Jones sprained his ankle, Brown had turf toe/dislocated elbow and Suggs had a neck stinger and turf toe. I really don't know how I could have built more depth than that. I considered trading for another runner at times but didn't. I'm glad I had the option though.
You can never build up so much depth at a position that a string of bad luck wouldn't force you to search out trade partners.
Last edited by a moderator:
SammyJankis
Footballguy
Late trades never happen in the NFL season for two reasons:1) The salary cap. Trade a player and you eat the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus. With a high draft pick or a marqee player, this amount is signficant enough to make a trade for a big name player almost impossible. In addition, while teams carve out extra salary cap room in the offseason, by the time the season starts, they are right up against the cap.
2) You cannot plug and play in the NFL. Peyton Manning gets traded to offense that they doesn't know and he isn't going to look like Peyton Manning. It takes a long time to learn the playbook, other player's responsibilties, the scheme, etc. The learning curve is steep enough that players traded mid-season aren't very useful to the team taking them on.
Last edited by a moderator:
the answer to your question obviously depends on the size of the roster in your league...handcuffing the backup to one or more of your QB's would seem to be the obvious answer....otherwise injuries, early retirements, etc are part of the game....just like in the NFL....say McNabb was your starter and Maddox considered your backup.....if you were a real NFL team and both of those guys went down for you.....what would your options be.....trade for another starter.....??....I don't think so....you'd have to go to your practice squad or sign the Jamie Martin's of the world....
the point you make actually hurts your arguement more than it helps it....
precisely.....but not in fantasy football......Manning is still Manning....that is why late season trades should not be allowed in dynasty leagues...
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
Clearly, team A wasn't making a horrible trade. Trading a vet for some high draft choices makes sense in a Dynasty league.One rule in my league really helps. Don't know how your league handles this, but any team in m league that does not field a complete roster in any given week is automatically fined $10. So in our league, that trade would be fine. But turning in a lineup without the proper linuep roster is totally uncool.
SammyJankis
Footballguy
This league isn't any fun, but it sure is realistic.....I've never played dynasty football because it was realistic. I mean, we start two RBs each week. My starting backfield is Kevin Jones and Jamal Lewis. I wouldn't say that's very realistic. You can pick guys off the waiver wire and have them be productive right away, which isn't consistant with the NFL.
There are many rules that you could adopt in FF to make it more realistic, but in general they make them less fun.
I play in a dynasty league because of the complexity of balancing the short-term vs. long-term goals of the team. Disallowing "fire sales" and having a ridiculously early trading deadline don't sound like fun to me. They limit the complexity of the game and take away weapons from the more savy owners in your league. It seems like weeks with a week 6 trading deadline would be rewarding the title to the guy with the least injuries each year.
while in your league the title would go to the guy who hits the best fire sale......
ExtraPoint
Footballguy
It is a level playing field. There are more than two teams in the league. Every team has the ability to trade before the trade deadline. That means every single owner who is in contention has the ability to trade future draft picks or young prospects for veterans. Every single team who is out of contention has the ability to trade older players for picks or younger players. Every single team has the ability to trade for older players or draft picks regardless of if they are in playoff conention or not. That is a level playing field. The only playing field that isnt level is that some owners are afraid of trading or ignorant in how to make a good trade while others are good at it. That same difference can be found in a redraft league.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
Basically, I'd need to know what week the trade was made. You're playing within the rules and the longterm certainly matters, so in general I don't have a problem with it. However, I agree with the notion that the trade deadline really should be early enough (say week 10), that there's more of a decision of letting go of the season and the like. These trades are tougher in week 10 than in week 13 IMO.I almost got screwed (IMO) when a non-playoff team traded Favre and Kevin Jones to my opponent for McGahee (the team I was playing ended up with an injured QB). During the playoffs, mind you. Needless to say, that rule is going bye-bye and a deadline's being added.-QG
obviously FF does not totally look the the NFL in concept (having 2 RB's from different teams)....but the trading and ethical concepts could look very similiar.....in FF our backups are still usually starters....like in the example we have used above with McNabb and Maddox from the past.....I just don't think a fantasy team should be able to "aquire" a Priest Holmes right before the playoffs....that is just ridiculous.....it hurts the league that year even though it may help the the team losing Priest next year....it kind of makes the end of the season a "joke" if trades like that happen....
jurb26
Footballguy
What you seem to be missing though is that there needs to be a balance. People want to win in FF, that is the goal. Outside of having fun of course. However for a lot of people posting a competetive team that wins is what makes it fun. A lot of folks would probably be rather PO'd if they spent 2-4 years building a team that was finally coming around and making a move just to see another team that was in the gutter make a huge trade to send a Holmes like player to a big competitor for that season. There are many ethical issue that could arise from such a situation. For one, what stops that guy with Holmes from simply creating an auction like athosphere for his player? He knows that who ever of the playoff teams he trades him to is nearly sure to win that year. He could basically name his price among them! Yet only one can benifit other than him. He has thus for the most part determined the out come of the season and significantly impeeded the work of the other contenders to miss out on Holmes. This trade in no way makes his team better for the given season which is usually part of any rules. To try to remain competetive for evey season, not just the ones you pick and choose.
GregR_2
Footballguy
Edited for correctness.
Trading is part of FF, and in a dynasty league it's going to be an even bigger part. Being the person with the depth to make trades, and the savvy to be able to get people to make you the team they trade with is part of the game, so it SHOULD have a bearing on the title. Every team in playoff contention has equal opportunity to go out and make such trades. If they choose not to sacrifice some of their future success for the shot at the present, that's their strategy they chose.You know, one other thing about this whole thread. When I think of a dynasty fire sale, I'm thinking of a team trading 2, maybe 3 of their better players... probably older vets with a short shelf life. Dealing anything else they would probably get back a much bigger edge in value that makes the trade even more obviously correct for them to make. Some of the comments seem awful full of talk about how the team is trading everything away with no chance at winning. I've never seen a dynasty league that you could get back that many future picks to make it worth trading your entire roster.
And the whole thing about the problem being that the trade happens later in the season gets to me too. So it's wrong to make the trade when there are only 4 games left, none of which can help you make the championship... but it would have been less wrong to have made the trade a few weeks earlier when there were more games left that you wouldn't have had the player for? That doesn't make sense either.
Last edited by a moderator:
you relabled tanking again....solid.....Edited for correctness.
You know, one other thing about this whole thread. When I think of a dynasty fire sale, I'm thinking of a team trading 2, maybe 3 of their better players... probably older vets with a short shelf life. Dealing anything else they would probably get back a much bigger edge in value that makes the trade even more obviously correct for them to make. Some of the comments seem awful full of talk about how the team is trading everything away with no chance at winning. I've never seen a dynasty league that you could get back that many future picks to make it worth trading your entire roster.
And the whole thing about the problem being that the trade happens later in the season gets to me too. So it's wrong to make the trade when there are only 4 games left, none of which can help you make the championship... but it would have been less wrong to have made the trade a few weeks earlier when there were more games left that you wouldn't have had the player for? That doesn't make sense either.
the out of contention part is a huge factor.....weeks earlier that factor is not there....why is that hard to understand
jurb26
Footballguy
I agree. basically all you basically did was restate how everyone has a chance to take advantage of a trade that will offset the balance of the league for that year. Yeah thats true, everyone does have a chance to make an offer and try to get that player or players. However, the simply fact remains that 1 teams WILL become significantly worse for that given year and another will become significantly better. What are the other 6-14 teams supposed to do. All of them can't possibly benifit from on guy jumping ship on his current roster. A lot of them may have had great chances to win that given year prior to the deal too. If there are 4 tems with an inside track at the Champ but only one team in the gutter looking to deal a Holmes. No matter how you justify it, 3 other teams will be getting screwed!you relabled tanking again....solid.....Edited for correctness.
You know, one other thing about this whole thread. When I think of a dynasty fire sale, I'm thinking of a team trading 2, maybe 3 of their better players... probably older vets with a short shelf life. Dealing anything else they would probably get back a much bigger edge in value that makes the trade even more obviously correct for them to make. Some of the comments seem awful full of talk about how the team is trading everything away with no chance at winning. I've never seen a dynasty league that you could get back that many future picks to make it worth trading your entire roster.
And the whole thing about the problem being that the trade happens later in the season gets to me too. So it's wrong to make the trade when there are only 4 games left, none of which can help you make the championship... but it would have been less wrong to have made the trade a few weeks earlier when there were more games left that you wouldn't have had the player for? That doesn't make sense either.
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree. basically all you basically did was restate how everyone has a chance to take advantage of a trade that will offset the balance of the league for that year. Yeah thats true, everyone does have a chance to make an offer and try to get that player or players. However, the simply fact remains that 1 teams WILL become significantly worse for that given year and another will become significantly better. What are the other 6-14 teams supposed to do. All of them can't possibly benifit from on guy jumping ship on his current roster. A lot of them may have had great chances to win that given year prior to the deal too. If there are 4 tems with an inside track at the Champ but only one team in the gutter looking to deal a Holmes. No matter how you justify it, 3 other teams will be getting screwed!you relabled tanking again....solid.....Edited for correctness.
You know, one other thing about this whole thread. When I think of a dynasty fire sale, I'm thinking of a team trading 2, maybe 3 of their better players... probably older vets with a short shelf life. Dealing anything else they would probably get back a much bigger edge in value that makes the trade even more obviously correct for them to make. Some of the comments seem awful full of talk about how the team is trading everything away with no chance at winning. I've never seen a dynasty league that you could get back that many future picks to make it worth trading your entire roster.
And the whole thing about the problem being that the trade happens later in the season gets to me too. So it's wrong to make the trade when there are only 4 games left, none of which can help you make the championship... but it would have been less wrong to have made the trade a few weeks earlier when there were more games left that you wouldn't have had the player for? That doesn't make sense either.
precisely what I have been trying to say......you can justify IT by saying every team has a chance to do IT.....but IT is not good for the league...and IT can affect the outcome of the league right before or during the playoffs...
Last edited by a moderator:
SammyJankis
Footballguy
I've seen this exact scenario happen plenty of times. I fail to see the ethical issue.A team goes into the gutter but has an aging star that is producing. Isn't that player a lot more valuable to a contender than it is to the gutter team? Isn't stocking up on younger players more valuable to the gutter team than the aging vet?If you're a contender, when the trade deadline approaches, you better be looking to patch any holes in your lineup. How is it unfair if my opponent makes a deal for a Holmes-like player when I'm a contender? I could be out there making that deal myself if that was what I chose to do. The Holmes-like player will most assuredly not come cheap. The owner that deals for him is going to pay an arm and a leg in terms of younger players/draft picks."He knows that who ever of the playoff teams he trades him to is nearly sure to win that year." Huh? I wish it was that simple. Winning a championship takes years of careful drafting and maneuvering. One guy does not a championship team make.
jurb26
Footballguy
Sammy are you not even willing to admit that these types of trades skew the current year? I mean it has already been esablished earlier in this thread that they WOULD NOT BE HAPPENING if the team in question had not been out of contention. If the trade skews its given year and similar trades are completed every year prior and in addition to that year, you have a SKEWED dynasty!
Last edited by a moderator:
SammyJankis
Footballguy
Evening playing field = All teams have an equal chance of winning.From our friends at Marriam Webster:
Who wants an even playing field? I don't. I can give myself a better chance to win today by sacrificing tomorrow. Conversely, I can give myself a better chance to win tommorrow by sacrificing today. That's precisely what the owner trading for the "Priest-Holmes type of player" at the trading deadline is doing. He's swinging for the fences in a "shoot the moon" attempt to win it all this year. He better hope he's right, because moves like this often have your team circling the bowl in a year or two.
Fun debate though.
SammyJankis
Footballguy
How is the year skewed? Sure they wouldn't be happening if the seller wasn't out of contention, in the same way that they are necessitated by the buyer being in contention. We have a situation where someone wants to sell something and someone else that wants to pay the asking price. Its not skewed, its the nature of dynasty play and what makes it so fun, sacrifice short term gain for long term gain and vice versa.
You act as if a mediocre team can make a last minute deal and that deal catapults the team to an easy super bowl win. This is not the case. When you're a contender, you hope to avoid making any deadline deals. If you're a contender, you're probably a savy team. Perhaps you've heard "buy low, sell high" before? Who in their right mind wants to go shopping when prices are at their absolute peak?
EBF
Footballguy
I pretty much agree with everything Sammy has said. My league's discussion of this topic is similar to the one taking place here. You have a lot of people who understand the reasoning behind "fire sales" and a vocal minority who view them as sacrelige. I think the real problem is that some teams don't understand the concept of dynasty value. A team that looks to be "tanking" for the present season may in fact be loading up with talent. It's not heroic to pass on the opportunity to improve your cellar dwelling team's future by trading vets for high picks. It's stupid.
I do not think the poll is an accurate viewpoint of the real issue....many people probably voted without reading anymore than the question on the front page....ONCE AGAIN......the point that you are not seeing is that there is not a problem with the strategy itself.....trading an impact veteran for fiture picks....IS A PERFECTLY FINE ACCEPTABLE STRATEGY.....
IT IS THE TIMING AND RATIONALE BEHIND THE DEAL THAT IS THE PROBLEM...
I have been eliminated from the playoffs.....now I will make a deal that I normally wouldn't......during the season...... and right before the playoffs start happening for all the other owners.....this year is over for me....I DON'T NEED TO STAY COMPETITIVE THIS YEAR ANYMORE.....EVEN THOUGH I STILL HAVE 4 VERY IMPORTANT GAMES TO PLAY THAT COULD STILL AFFECT THE OUTCOME OF THE SEASON FOR EVERYBODY ELSE....it doesn't matter if I win another game or not....in fact if I don't win anymore games.....not only will I get some great picks in the trade I am about to do (even though normally I would never consider this)....I will also get a higher draft pick because of my record.....it doesn't matter I don't give a #### about this year anymore....I need to to think about next year....so I will have a fire sale and try to get some picks for next year....whoever gives me the best deal can have my best player(s)....it may stink for them next year....but that team will be able to get some players from me that he normally wouldn't.....because even I am admitting that it is a fire sale....and a fire sale by definition means people are probably getting something they wouldn't normally be able to get....it is after all a fire sale....now that team has aquired my good players for his Super Bowl run.....he's happy....I'm happy.....screw the other 10-14 guys in the league.....they all had a chance to give me a call....that makes it fair.....this season will end the way it should even though I just loaded up that playoff contender with my best players....everything is fine....
nightshift
Footballguy
What's blows my mind is that 108 of you beleive that fire sale trading to the point of forfeiting the remainder of your season's games is OKAY. Nice strategy for losers, I guess.I must be in the fortunate minority that has never lost so bad that I lost my integrity too. Don't get me wrong; I think your should rebuild a losing squad. But not by getting depleting your current squad to the point you automatically lose every game left in a season. Trading is one thing; fire sales are another. Fire sales are trades taken to extreme.Losing sucks. No argument there. But losing and then compounding it by trading away my current team's competitveness (for whatever reason) to the point I am forfeiting games, that really sucks.BTW, fire sales, by nature, tend to favor the buyer than the seller.
jurb26
Footballguy
This is the best description I have heard yet of what is really going on in a firesale. There is no way to justify the deal for the given year it happens. If you could, you would not have to wait untill your team was out of contetion to perform such a deal. You are openly admitting that your chances of winning this year are shot, so you may as well invest solely on next year and jump ship on your current season. Is that really "staying competitive?" Yeha maybe it is attempting to become more competitie in the future, but it is certianly not for the current season. When lopsided deals such as this occur every year...... well you figure it out.As a savy FF player, I will do this too. So long as the rules permit it. It is like drafting players I don't like though. You simply can not let it get in the way of doing what is best for your team and chances of winning. If I were to start a dynasty league myself though, I would certianly institute a trade deadline. Following the rules of yoru league and adapting to them does not mean that you have to agree with them ethically 100%.
jurb26
Footballguy
I absolutly agree with this. I voted it to be OK, based on the fact that if the rules don't cover it our ALLOW it, then everyone should take notice and decide for themsleves. Don't join or leave the league if this would bother you so much. This does not however in any way mean I have to agree with it in principle! Only that I am willing to play along.
Last edited by a moderator:
purplehaze67
Footballguy
So, it's just that simple, huh? Trading away an aging stud or two = a 100% chance of losing every game from then on out. Not in my experience. You still gotta play the game every week, and sometimes the lesser team on paper wins out. It happens.
Oh, so now taking a longer-term view of your team = loss of integrity. Again, not in my experience. But good to know, I suppose.
Again with the "automatic forfeit" angle. Not the case.So, at what exact point does "rebuilding" cross over into "depeleting"? Sounds like a judgement call to me, and those are always going to open for individual interpretation.
By who's measure? What's "extreme" to you may not be to others.
The third pass of the ol' forfeit take. It's just not the case, no matter how many times you state it. Trading away talent for future betterment does not automatically = going 0-for the rest of the year. FF is just not that cut and dried, no matter how much you'd like it to be. Sorry.
And maybe they do. So what? Ask the guy who had ESmith and a mediocre 2004 team if they'd have gotten more for Smith in week 10 or now? Sometimes you gotta realize that the title is not going to be yours in the current year, and do what it takes to better your chances the next year or the year after. Maybe selling an aging vet at a bit of a discount helps accomplish that. Oh well.How are you better off standing pat and ending up around .500 for the next few years? I'd certainly rather take a current-year hit in order to be more competitive down the road.
Bottom line, dynastly leagues foster the idea that different owners are going to be on different timetables and thus have different measures of value. And when that happens, trades like this are a natuaral result. I really don't see any way around it except to stick to redrafts.
jurb26
Footballguy
Maybe the definition of Firesale would be of some help:
Main Entry: fire saleFunction: noun: a sale of merchandise damaged in a fire; also : a sale at very low pricesLinkThe "so what" is that they are NOT at a "bit" of a discount, but at "very low prices." Prices that NORMALLY would not be available and that also throw off the competetive balance for the given year.
CalBear
Footballguy
Taking advantage of temporary changes in perception of value is the essence of trading. In 2003 I got Chad Johnson for Mike Anderson when Portis went down; that's a deal that was only possible to make one week in the entire year, and I jumped on it because it represented good value for me. It didn't "throw off the competitive balance"; it was part of the competitive balance, as trades are part of the league. If you want to play in a no-trade league, go ahead. If you're going to allow trades, allowing dynasty teams to trade current production for future prospects is the essence of what trading in a dynasty league should be.
jurb26
Footballguy
Again, your example is a poor one... though it does have a point and I acknowldge that. Injuries are a different animal/situaion all together. Injuries create immedieate holes and needs on rosters. In a firesale, which we are discussing. The team simply did not perform up to a level high enough to contend. Do you not see the GLARING difference here?
Again though.... flood control vs. throwing in the towel.
Last edited by a moderator:
GregR_2
Footballguy
You're not seriously saying that you think the firesale prices are bringing the team trading away the aging vet LESS value than he could get if he held onto the vet and traded him at some other point in the season, are you?It's the exact opposite, in fact. If the team could get more for a 2004 Jerome Bettis or Curtis Martin in the off-season, they'd wait and trade them then.
CalBear
Footballguy
No, really I don't. First of all, if the team didn't perform up to a level high enough to contend, they're not sitting on a bunch of talent in the first place. Second, it doesn't change the issue; if it's a good trade for both teams, the rest of the league has no standing to complain about it.
