[DYNASTY] Firesales (1 Viewer)

[purplehaze67]

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.

Again, by who's judgement? If I decide that a 2006 3rd rounder is more valuable to me then 1/3 of a season from ESmith when I know I have little chance to win now, that's my right as a franchise owner to pull the trigger on that deal. As I mentioned above, that's the nature of a dynasty. Some owners are trying to win now and others are setting themselves up to be better in future years. Trading vets for draft picks is the best way to do this.

I'd be totally ticked if I was prohibited from making a move I deem necessary for the ultimate betterment of my team, just because it may mean only winning 4 games instead of 6 this year.

 

[jurb26]

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?

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.

Huh? How many times have you seen a team in any league have no players of value on them? Heck, just 2 years ago with Holmes still in his FF prime, the team that owned him in one of my leagues finished 2nd to last. He finished that low having the best FF player in the world at the time! Of course this is an extreme example, but still every time has some players of good value.The problem is that it is not a good trade for both teams in the current season for which it happens. If it was, it would not be a "firesale" trade. Firesales by definition mean one party is getting a lopsided deal. Over time maybe that evens out. However, that does not change the fact that its present value is NOT =.

 

[purplehaze67]

No, what I am saying is that it is below the players PRESENT VALUE. If it is not below the PRESENT VALUE, then it is not a firesale by definition.

Who is this final, ultimate arbiter of PRESENT VALUE? People value different players differently and team situation has a lot to do with that. As long as I get a feel that every owner is acting for the ultimate betterment of their team, any transaction made is fine by me. To some, that betterment is an increased chance to win this year and to others, it's a chance to contend later.

 

[jurb26]

Are you guys just flat out ignoring the definition of the term FIRESALE on purpose? I didn't define the word or start this thread using it. But the bottom line is that a FIRESALE by definition is a sale at "very low proces." Hence not = value. You guys keep refering to things at FAIR prices, not VERY LOW. We need to either eliminate the word or more clearly define what the real question is, so we get on the same page here.The definition contradicts what you are saying.

 

[Titans_fan]

Firesale trades never happen in the NFL, huh? Let's see....The Washington Redskins traded their first-round pick (5th) to the New Orleans Saints for a first (12th), third (71), fourth (107), fifth (144), sixth (179) and seventh-round pick (218) in this year's draft and a first and third-round selection in 2000. This was the Ricky Williams trade. Washington eventually got Champ Bailey in this draft.The end results of the trade after 1992: Vikings Cowboys WR Jake Reed RB Emmitt Smith DT Russell Maryland CB Kevin Smith S Darren Woodson CB Clayton HolmesOf course this is "The Trade".....it appears Minnesota felt they were only 1 player away from winning it all in OCTOBER of 1989 and felt that player was Herschel Walker....they mortgaged their future onit, and lost!There are probably more examples, but these are the 2 most prominent in my life. I don't think this is unethical, just what is best for either current or future business!

 

[jurb26]

Firesale trades never happen in the NFL, huh? Let's see....

The Washington Redskins traded their first-round pick (5th) to the New Orleans Saints for a first (12th), third (71), fourth (107), fifth (144), sixth (179) and seventh-round pick (218) in this year's draft and a first and third-round selection in 2000.

This was the Ricky Williams trade. Washington eventually got Champ Bailey in this draft.

The end results of the trade after 1992:

Vikings Cowboys

WR Jake Reed RB Emmitt Smith

DT Russell Maryland

CB Kevin Smith

S Darren Woodson

CB Clayton Holmes

Of course this is "The Trade".....it appears Minnesota felt they were only 1 player away from winning it all in OCTOBER of 1989 and felt that player was Herschel Walker....they mortgaged their future onit, and lost!

There are probably more examples, but these are the 2 most prominent in my life. I don't think this is unethical, just what is best for either current or future business!

Did this trade happen 2 weeks before the playoffs started?

 

[purplehaze67]

Are you guys just flat out ignoring the definition of the term FIRESALE on purpose? I didn't define the word or start this thread using it. But the bottom line is that a FIRESALE by definition is a sale at "very low proces." Hence not = value. You guys keep refering to things at FAIR prices, not VERY LOW. We need to either eliminate the word or more clearly define what the real question is, so we get on the same page here.

The definition contradicts what you are saying.

No. I am asking who/how the absolute value of a player is determined? I know I value certain players differently then consensus, and would end up paying more (or less) then you or someone else might be willing to. So? As long as collusion isn't an issue (ie: all parties are sincerely out to better their team), that's how the game is played. No problems here...

 

[Titans_fan]

Firesale trades never happen in the NFL, huh?  Let's see....

The Washington Redskins traded their first-round pick (5th) to the New Orleans Saints for a first (12th), third (71), fourth (107), fifth (144), sixth (179) and seventh-round pick (218) in this year's draft and a first and third-round selection in 2000.

This was the Ricky Williams trade.  Washington eventually got Champ Bailey in this draft.

The end results of the trade after 1992:

Vikings                          Cowboys 

WR Jake Reed                RB Emmitt Smith 

                                    DT Russell Maryland 

                                    CB Kevin Smith 

                                    S Darren Woodson 

                                    CB Clayton Holmes

Of course this is "The Trade".....it appears Minnesota felt they were only 1 player away from winning it all in OCTOBER of 1989 and felt that player was Herschel Walker....they mortgaged their future onit, and lost!

There are probably more examples, but these are the 2 most prominent in my life.  I don't think this is unethical, just what is best for either current or future business!

Did this trade happen 2 weeks before the playoffs started?

The Walker trade happened just before week 8. Minnesota was 5-2 and Dallas was 0-7, and likely out of the playoff hunt. The point of the trade, however, was the same as the one in question....The Cowboys had one of (if not the) best running backs in the game at that time, and opted to send him to Minnesota for a plethora of draft picks....did this help the Vikings? Maybe in the short-term, but that is what they wanted. The Cowboys got what the Vikings thought was fair-market value and looked to the future. I bet the 2 teams would have made this deal in week 14 if the NFL would have allowed it!

 

[CalBear]

Are you guys just flat out ignoring the definition of the term FIRESALE on purpose? I didn't define the word or start this thread using it. But the bottom line is that a FIRESALE by definition is a sale at "very low proces." Hence not = value. You guys keep refering to things at FAIR prices, not VERY LOW. We need to either eliminate the word or more clearly define what the real question is, so we get on the same page here.

The definition contradicts what you are saying.

Once again: If any of the other owners think the value being offered in the trade is too low, they should have made a better offer.

 

[fatgirlsrock]

Are you guys just flat out ignoring the definition of the term FIRESALE on purpose? I didn't define the word or start this thread using it. But the bottom line is that a FIRESALE by definition is a sale at "very low proces." Hence not = value. You guys keep refering to things at FAIR prices, not VERY LOW. We need to either eliminate the word or more clearly define what the real question is, so we get on the same page here.

The definition contradicts what you are saying.

Once again: If any of the other owners think the value being offered in the trade is too low, they should have made a better offer.

Exactly.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

this thread.....and it's even in the title.....is about firesales and we all know what they are....we are not talking a simple trade...we are talking firesales.....where a team realizes it's season is over so it accepts the fact that they are lessening their chances to win anymore games that year and they don't really care if they win another game that season (even though it affects the rest of the season for the rest of the owners)...in order to try and have a better season next year....they would not have made this trade earlier in the year and they do not want to wait until the season is over....because then they wouldn't get such a good deal...agreed by most that this defines the word "tanking"so in summary:some think firesales are an accepted form of strategy in a dynasty league no matter when they take place.....firesales are good for the league even if they affect the outcome of the playoffs.....and that is justified because evrybody can do it and has a shot to make a deal.....others think that a firesale is an accepted form of strategy but that they should not be allowed right before the playoffs since it will disrupt the competitive balance of the league for the rest of THAT year....yes the firesaler and the firesalee are happy but who gives a #### about the rest of the league.....and each year the season will progress and then have some drastic changes take place (firesales... we know what they are)...so each year the last few weeks of the season will be changed by the upcoming firesale from one or more owners who are out of it....we do not like this and think that an early trade deadline should be implemented....we are not against firesales before or after the season....we just think a player like Priest Holmes should not be switching teams late in the year for players that aren't even in the NFL yet.....if Priest were to be traded for say LT late in the year....no problem.....draft picks NEXT year =problem if it happens right before the playoffs...

 

[SammyJankis]

Are you guys just flat out ignoring the definition of the term FIRESALE on purpose? I didn't define the word or start this thread using it. But the bottom line is that a FIRESALE by definition is a sale at "very low proces." Hence not = value. You guys keep refering to things at FAIR prices, not VERY LOW. We need to either eliminate the word or more clearly define what the real question is, so we get on the same page here.

The definition contradicts what you are saying.

A "fire sale" literally means selling goods damaged in a fire. As the dictionary definition also mentions, the term "fire sale" can also be used to convey the notion of selling things on the cheap.But when a dynasty team's season goes down the drain and they announce that they are having a "fire sale", they are not telling you that trade prices are low, rather thet are trying to convey an "everything must go attitude". They are telling you that players they wouldn't consider parting with a few weeks ago are now on the open market.

Anyone that makes a deadline deal in a dynasty league will confirm that prices at that point in time are at their highest, not lowest point.

 

[-OZ-]

this thread.....and it's even in the title.....is about firesales and we all know what they are....we are not talking a simple trade...we are talking firesales.....where a team realizes it's season is over so it accepts the fact that they are lessening their chances to win anymore games that year and they don't really care if they win another game that season (even though it affects the rest of the season for the rest of the owners)...in order to try and have a better season next year....they would not have made this trade earlier in the year and they do not want to wait until the season is over....because then they wouldn't get such a good deal...agreed by most that this defines the word "tanking"

so in summary:

some think firesales are an accepted form of strategy in a dynasty league no matter when they take place.....firesales are good for the league even if they affect the outcome of the playoffs.....and that is justified because evrybody can do it and has a shot to make a deal.....

others think that a firesale is an accepted form of strategy but that they should not be allowed right before the playoffs since it will disrupt the competitive balance of the league for the rest of THAT year....yes the firesaler and the firesalee are happy but who gives a #### about the rest of the league.....and each year the season will progress and then have some drastic changes take place (firesales... we know what they are)...so each year the last few weeks of the season will be changed by the upcoming firesale from one or more owners who are out of it....we do not like this and think that an early trade deadline should be implemented....we are not against firesales before or after the season....we just think a player like Priest Holmes should not be switching teams late in the year for players that aren't even in the NFL yet.....if Priest were to be traded for say LT late in the year....no problem.....draft picks NEXT year =problem if it happens right before the playoffs...

Good points, but where I disagree is if the "firesale" is open to the "public".Sure, if in week 12, Team X gave team Y the only chance at Priest, for his 1st round pick, that would be a problem.

If he emails the league saying "Priest is available for the best offer, he will go, it's just a question of who wants to pay the most" - what's the issue? This is still a firesale, similar to a "going out of business" sale, in that "everything must go...", but the furniture dealer sure doesn't care who buys the couch, just that it is gone and he gets something in return, ideally the most possible.

In the end:

"Give away to friend" = BAD

Public firesale = OK

Also, who's to say that part of a dynasty strategy isn't compiling tradeable commodities? If I think I'm going to be a contender, but want to hedge a little, I will compile the next year's 1st round picks. As one of my players underperforms or gets injured (LOVE the Priest analogy, though it's backwards) I will deal next year's picks to a team out of contention. That is a viable strategy.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

this thread.....and it's even in the title.....is about firesales and we all know what they are....we are not talking a simple trade...we are talking firesales.....where a team realizes it's season is over so it accepts the fact that they are lessening their chances to win anymore games that year and they don't really care if they win another game that season (even though it affects the rest of the season for the rest of the owners)...in order to try and have a better season next year....they would not have made this trade earlier in the year and they do not want to wait until the season is over....because then they wouldn't get such a good deal...agreed by most that this defines the word "tanking"

so in summary:

some think firesales are an accepted form of strategy in a dynasty league no matter when they take place.....firesales are good for the league even if they affect the outcome of the playoffs.....and that is justified because evrybody can do it and has a shot to make a deal.....

others think that a firesale is an accepted form of strategy but that they should not be allowed right before the playoffs since it will disrupt the competitive balance of the league for the rest of THAT year....yes the firesaler and the firesalee are happy but who gives a #### about the rest of the league.....and each year the season will progress and then have some drastic changes take place (firesales... we know what they are)...so each year the last few weeks of the season will be changed by the upcoming firesale from one or more owners who are out of it....we do not like this and think that an early trade deadline should be implemented....we are not against firesales before or after the season....we just think a player like Priest Holmes should not be switching teams late in the year for players that aren't even in the NFL yet.....if Priest were to be traded for say LT late in the year....no problem.....draft picks NEXT year =problem if it happens right before the playoffs...

Good points, but where I disagree is if the "firesale" is open to the "public".Sure, if in week 12, Team X gave team Y the only chance at Priest, for his 1st round pick, that would be a problem.

If he emails the league saying "Priest is available for the best offer, he will go, it's just a question of who wants to pay the most" - what's the issue? This is still a firesale, similar to a "going out of business" sale, in that "everything must go...", but the furniture dealer sure doesn't care who buys the couch, just that it is gone and he gets something in return, ideally the most possible.

In the end:

"Give away to friend" = BAD

Public firesale = OK

Also, who's to say that part of a dynasty strategy isn't compiling tradeable commodities? If I think I'm going to be a contender, but want to hedge a little, I will compile the next year's 1st round picks. As one of my players underperforms or gets injured (LOVE the Priest analogy, though it's backwards) I will deal next year's picks to a team out of contention. That is a viable strategy.

you have made my point for me....."Priest must go....he is going to go no matter what".....and in the scenerio that is being mentioned....he is going for NEXT year's picks.....not staright up right now for someone like Deuce MAC......a impact player player like Priest...who normally wouldn't hardly ever be traded to begin with....should not be traded to a playoff contending team by a non contending playoff team....juts because one team is out of the playoffs and is having a firesale casue his season is over and he doesn't care anymore about his remaining games.....the rest of the league does care about his remaining games and the remaining games of the team that just got Priest....the "he is going...firesale....no matter what attitude" at the end of the season disrupts the established competitive balnce for the rest of the league for the rest of that year....wait a few weeks (season over) and then trade him....like the NFL does........

 

[-OZ-]

this thread.....and it's even in the title.....is about firesales and we all know what they are....we are not talking a simple trade...we are talking firesales.....where a team realizes it's season is over so it accepts the fact that they are lessening their chances to win anymore games that year and they don't really care if they win another game that season (even though it affects the rest of the season for the rest of the owners)...in order to try and have a better season next year....they would not have made this trade earlier in the year and they do not want to wait until the season is over....because then they wouldn't get such a good deal...agreed by most that this defines the word "tanking"

so in summary:

some think firesales are an accepted form of strategy in a dynasty league no matter when they take place.....firesales are good for the league even if they affect the outcome of the playoffs.....and that is justified because evrybody can do it and has a shot to make a deal.....

others think that a firesale is an accepted form of strategy but that they should not be allowed right before the playoffs since it will disrupt the competitive balance of the league for the rest of THAT year....yes the firesaler and the firesalee are happy but who gives a #### about the rest of the league.....and each year the season will progress and then have some drastic changes take place (firesales... we know what they are)...so each year the last few weeks of the season will be changed by the upcoming firesale from one or more owners who are out of it....we do not like this and think that an early trade deadline should be implemented....we are not against firesales before or after the season....we just think a player like Priest Holmes should not be switching teams late in the year for players that aren't even in the NFL yet.....if Priest were to be traded for say LT late in the year....no problem.....draft picks NEXT year =problem if it happens right before the playoffs...

Good points, but where I disagree is if the "firesale" is open to the "public".Sure, if in week 12, Team X gave team Y the only chance at Priest, for his 1st round pick, that would be a problem.

If he emails the league saying "Priest is available for the best offer, he will go, it's just a question of who wants to pay the most" - what's the issue? This is still a firesale, similar to a "going out of business" sale, in that "everything must go...", but the furniture dealer sure doesn't care who buys the couch, just that it is gone and he gets something in return, ideally the most possible.

In the end:

"Give away to friend" = BAD

Public firesale = OK

Also, who's to say that part of a dynasty strategy isn't compiling tradeable commodities? If I think I'm going to be a contender, but want to hedge a little, I will compile the next year's 1st round picks. As one of my players underperforms or gets injured (LOVE the Priest analogy, though it's backwards) I will deal next year's picks to a team out of contention. That is a viable strategy.

you have made my point for me....."Priest must go....he is going to go no matter what".....and in the scenerio that is being mentioned....he is going for NEXT year's picks.....not staright up right now for someone like Deuce MAC......a impact player player like Priest...who normally wouldn't hardly ever be traded to begin with....should not be traded to a playoff contending team by a non contending playoff team....juts because one team is out of the playoffs and is having a firesale casue his season is over and he doesn't care anymore about his remaining games.....the rest of the league does care about his remaining games and the remaining games of the team that just got Priest....the "he is going...firesale....no matter what attitude" at the end of the season disrupts the established competitive balnce for the rest of the league for the rest of that year....wait a few weeks (season over) and then trade him....like the NFL does........

If everyone has a chance at him, the person who has compiled the ability to get him will win. That isn't upsetting the balance of a dynasty league. It might change this year (or Priest might get hurt the next week), but overall the team trading Priest gets better for the future, while the team getting Priest is better now. Why is this a problem? It's the same thing as if it happened at the start of the year IMO. Last August, I acquired Jimmy Smith for a 2005 2nd rounder. That upset some people, and it made my team better for 2004. Did it upset the balance of the league for the long run? I don't think so.

In late October, another team got Corey Dillon for Kurt Warner and a 2005 2nd rounder, I had no problem with that.

Why should it be different?

 

[Stinkin Ref]

this thread.....and it's even in the title.....is about firesales and we all know what they are....we are not talking a simple trade...we are talking firesales.....where a team realizes it's season is over so it accepts the fact that they are lessening their chances to win anymore games that year and they don't really care if they win another game that season (even though it affects the rest of the season for the rest of the owners)...in order to try and have a better season next year....they would not have made this trade earlier in the year and they do not want to wait until the season is over....because then they wouldn't get such a good deal...agreed by most that this defines the word "tanking"

so in summary:

some think firesales are an accepted form of strategy in a dynasty league no matter when they take place.....firesales are good for the league even if they affect the outcome of the playoffs.....and that is justified because evrybody can do it and has a shot to make a deal.....

others think that a firesale is an accepted form of strategy but that they should not be allowed right before the playoffs since it will disrupt the competitive balance of the league for the rest of THAT year....yes the firesaler and the firesalee are happy but who gives a #### about the rest of the league.....and each year the season will progress and then have some drastic changes take place (firesales... we know what they are)...so each year the last few weeks of the season will be changed by the upcoming firesale from one or more owners who are out of it....we do not like this and think that an early trade deadline should be implemented....we are not against firesales before or after the season....we just think a player like Priest Holmes should not be switching teams late in the year for players that aren't even in the NFL yet.....if Priest were to be traded for say LT late in the year....no problem.....draft picks NEXT year =problem if it happens right before the playoffs...

Good points, but where I disagree is if the "firesale" is open to the "public".Sure, if in week 12, Team X gave team Y the only chance at Priest, for his 1st round pick, that would be a problem.

If he emails the league saying "Priest is available for the best offer, he will go, it's just a question of who wants to pay the most" - what's the issue? This is still a firesale, similar to a "going out of business" sale, in that "everything must go...", but the furniture dealer sure doesn't care who buys the couch, just that it is gone and he gets something in return, ideally the most possible.

In the end:

"Give away to friend" = BAD

Public firesale = OK

Also, who's to say that part of a dynasty strategy isn't compiling tradeable commodities? If I think I'm going to be a contender, but want to hedge a little, I will compile the next year's 1st round picks. As one of my players underperforms or gets injured (LOVE the Priest analogy, though it's backwards) I will deal next year's picks to a team out of contention. That is a viable strategy.

you have made my point for me....."Priest must go....he is going to go no matter what".....and in the scenerio that is being mentioned....he is going for NEXT year's picks.....not staright up right now for someone like Deuce MAC......a impact player player like Priest...who normally wouldn't hardly ever be traded to begin with....should not be traded to a playoff contending team by a non contending playoff team....juts because one team is out of the playoffs and is having a firesale casue his season is over and he doesn't care anymore about his remaining games.....the rest of the league does care about his remaining games and the remaining games of the team that just got Priest....the "he is going...firesale....no matter what attitude" at the end of the season disrupts the established competitive balnce for the rest of the league for the rest of that year....wait a few weeks (season over) and then trade him....like the NFL does........

If everyone has a chance at him, the person who has compiled the ability to get him will win. That isn't upsetting the balance of a dynasty league. It might change this year (or Priest might get hurt the next week), but overall the team trading Priest gets better for the future, while the team getting Priest is better now. Why is this a problem? It's the same thing as if it happened at the start of the year IMO. Last August, I acquired Jimmy Smith for a 2005 2nd rounder. That upset some people, and it made my team better for 2004. Did it upset the balance of the league for the long run? I don't think so.

In late October, another team got Corey Dillon for Kurt Warner and a 2005 2nd rounder, I had no problem with that.

Why should it be different?

the little part of your post...."it might change this year"

is the exact problem...you brush over it like it is nothing

and for the last time....

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT "FIRESALES" INVOLVING IMPACT PLAYERS FOR FUTURE DRAFT PICKS THAT HAPPEN RIGHT BEFORE THE PLAYOFFS........

not a trade in August

 

[-OZ-]

this thread.....and it's even in the title.....is about firesales and we all know what they are....we are not talking a simple trade...we are talking firesales.....where a team realizes it's season is over so it accepts the fact that they are lessening their chances to win anymore games that year and they don't really care if they win another game that season (even though it affects the rest of the season for the rest of the owners)...in order to try and have a better season next year....they would not have made this trade earlier in the year and they do not want to wait until the season is over....because then they wouldn't get such a good deal...agreed by most that this defines the word "tanking"

so in summary:

some think firesales are an accepted form of strategy in a dynasty league no matter when they take place.....firesales are good for the league even if they affect the outcome of the playoffs.....and that is justified because evrybody can do it and has a shot to make a deal.....

others think that a firesale is an accepted form of strategy but that they should not be allowed right before the playoffs since it will disrupt the competitive balance of the league for the rest of THAT year....yes the firesaler and the firesalee are happy but who gives a #### about the rest of the league.....and each year the season will progress and then have some drastic changes take place (firesales... we know what they are)...so each year the last few weeks of the season will be changed by the upcoming firesale from one or more owners who are out of it....we do not like this and think that an early trade deadline should be implemented....we are not against firesales before or after the season....we just think a player like Priest Holmes should not be switching teams late in the year for players that aren't even in the NFL yet.....if Priest were to be traded for say LT late in the year....no problem.....draft picks NEXT year =problem if it happens right before the playoffs...

Good points, but where I disagree is if the "firesale" is open to the "public".Sure, if in week 12, Team X gave team Y the only chance at Priest, for his 1st round pick, that would be a problem.

If he emails the league saying "Priest is available for the best offer, he will go, it's just a question of who wants to pay the most" - what's the issue? This is still a firesale, similar to a "going out of business" sale, in that "everything must go...", but the furniture dealer sure doesn't care who buys the couch, just that it is gone and he gets something in return, ideally the most possible.

In the end:

"Give away to friend" = BAD

Public firesale = OK

Also, who's to say that part of a dynasty strategy isn't compiling tradeable commodities? If I think I'm going to be a contender, but want to hedge a little, I will compile the next year's 1st round picks. As one of my players underperforms or gets injured (LOVE the Priest analogy, though it's backwards) I will deal next year's picks to a team out of contention. That is a viable strategy.

you have made my point for me....."Priest must go....he is going to go no matter what".....and in the scenerio that is being mentioned....he is going for NEXT year's picks.....not staright up right now for someone like Deuce MAC......a impact player player like Priest...who normally wouldn't hardly ever be traded to begin with....should not be traded to a playoff contending team by a non contending playoff team....juts because one team is out of the playoffs and is having a firesale casue his season is over and he doesn't care anymore about his remaining games.....the rest of the league does care about his remaining games and the remaining games of the team that just got Priest....the "he is going...firesale....no matter what attitude" at the end of the season disrupts the established competitive balnce for the rest of the league for the rest of that year....wait a few weeks (season over) and then trade him....like the NFL does........

If everyone has a chance at him, the person who has compiled the ability to get him will win. That isn't upsetting the balance of a dynasty league. It might change this year (or Priest might get hurt the next week), but overall the team trading Priest gets better for the future, while the team getting Priest is better now. Why is this a problem? It's the same thing as if it happened at the start of the year IMO. Last August, I acquired Jimmy Smith for a 2005 2nd rounder. That upset some people, and it made my team better for 2004. Did it upset the balance of the league for the long run? I don't think so.

In late October, another team got Corey Dillon for Kurt Warner and a 2005 2nd rounder, I had no problem with that.

Why should it be different?

the little part of your post...."it might change this year"

is the exact problem...you brush over it like it is nothing

and for the last time....

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT "FIRESALES" INVOLVING IMPACT PLAYERS FOR FUTURE DRAFT PICKS THAT HAPPEN RIGHT BEFORE THE PLAYOFFS........

not a trade in August

I'm saying there isn't a difference, if you have no problem with the August deal, why the problem with the mid season deal?Or should a proven vet never be allowed to be traded for a pick / rookie?

The "exact problem" just isn't a problem if everyone is involved.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I guess I need to say it again.....FIRESALE.....the only reason I am making this trade is because I am out of contention....I have no chance of making the playoffs...I no longer care about this year....my remaining games that mean a lot to other owners mean nothing to me....that is not good for the league....teams now get to play you w/o Priest for the rest of the season when they normally wouldn't...and have to play the other team with Priest when they normally wouldn'tand PURPLEHAZE....if you make the trade in week one....then the rest of the league for the rest of the year is playing you without Priest....and the other team with Priest......so the balance of the league (head to head matchups) is not dirupted as much.....in a dynasty you must look to the future but you still also have an obligation to the present....and that obligation should be anattempt to win the Super Bowl each year....that is after all why we play...some might say trading Priest in week one would not be the best move to do that.....but the point is is that Priest should not be switching teams late in the year for future picks....there has to be a balance between the remaining importance of this year and allowing teams to build for the future....allowing late season trades of impact players by teams out of playoff contention for future draft picks does not attempt to maintain that balance....it dispupts it dramatically

 

[Skippy the one eyed Beagle]

some think firesales are an accepted form of strategy in a dynasty league no matter when they take place.....firesales are good for the league even if they affect the outcome of the playoffs.....and that is justified because evrybody can do it and has a shot to make a deal.....others think that a firesale is an accepted form of strategy but that they should not be allowed right before the playoffs since it will disrupt the competitive balance of the league for the rest of THAT year....yes the firesaler and the firesalee are happy but who gives a #### about the rest of the league.....and each year the season will progress and then have some drastic changes take place (firesales... we know what they are)...so each year the last few weeks of the season will be changed by the upcoming firesale from one or more owners who are out of it....we do not like this and think that an early trade deadline should be implemented....we are not against firesales before or after the season....we just think a player like Priest Holmes should not be switching teams late in the year for players that aren't even in the NFL yet.....if Priest were to be traded for say LT late in the year....no problem.....draft picks NEXT year =problem if it happens right before the playoffs...

I find it ironic that you summarize this by saying "some people" think that a firesale is ok when the voting shows that 95% support it - to me that sounds like MOST or ALMOST ALL.Personally, I think if you can't make this kind of deal, what is the point of playing in a dynasty league.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

some think firesales are an accepted form of strategy in a dynasty league no matter when they take place.....firesales are good for the league even if they affect the outcome of the playoffs.....and that is justified because evrybody can do it and has a shot to make a deal.....

others think that a firesale is an accepted form of strategy but that they should not be allowed right before the playoffs since it will disrupt the competitive balance of the league for the rest of THAT year....yes the firesaler and the firesalee are happy but who gives a #### about the rest of the league.....and each year the season will progress and then have some drastic changes take place (firesales... we know what they are)...so each year the last few weeks of the season will be changed by the upcoming firesale from one or more owners who are out of it....we do not like this and think that an early trade deadline should be implemented....we are not against firesales before or after the season....we just think a player like Priest Holmes should not be switching teams late in the year for players that aren't even in the NFL yet.....if Priest were to be traded for say LT late in the year....no problem.....draft picks NEXT year =problem if it happens right before the playoffs...

I find it ironic that you summarize this by saying "some people" think that a firesale is ok when the voting shows that 95% support it - to me that sounds like MOST or ALMOST ALL.Personally, I think if you can't make this kind of deal, what is the point of playing in a dynasty league.

you failed to quote the part where I also said I do not think the poll is an accurate representation of the actual issue at hand....as I am sure many people voted with out actually reading the thread....and it's pretty obvious you have not read the whole thread...because noone is saying these type of trades should not be allowed......it is the timing of the trade (right before the playoffs)....and the rationale behind the trade (I am out of contention...firesale time....come get impact players now for picks next year)....and the affect that this has on the remaining games that year for the rest of the league and the possible impact on determing the SB champ that year....

pre or post season is ok....just not before the playoffs

 

[purplehaze67]

and PURPLEHAZE....if you make the trade in week one....then the rest of the league for the rest of the year is playing you without Priest....and the other team with Priest......so the balance of the league (head to head matchups) is not dirupted as much.....

Not from my perspective, I guess. The balance of power within my division and the division with the team the acquires Priest are both changed.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

and PURPLEHAZE....if you make the trade in week one....then the rest of the league for the rest of the year is playing you without Priest....and the other team with Priest......so the balance of the league (head to head matchups) is not dirupted as much.....

Not from my perspective, I guess. The balance of power within my division and the division with the team the acquires Priest are both changed.

agreed.... and probably an addtional reason for trades involving future picks to be closely scrutinized during the season by the league....because as I said if you are trying to maintain a balance between the obligation to try and win this year and allowing you room to try and improve for future years....trading Priest in week one for picks the following year would definately not have the appearence that you were truly invested in trying to win the championship this year...as we know the value of having a player like Priest all year...even though you may get many "future" picks for him.....and I am sure your division mates would be very happy (except the poor guy who had to play you in week one with Priest)....and the division mates of the other guy would not be very happy.....but at least the majority of each team in each division is playing the teams all season long under similiar circumsatnces....except for the week one opponents....the whole season is played under those circumstances...not just the games leading up to playoff time...

 

[-OZ-]

pre or post season is ok....just not before the playoffs

Then make a "no trade" rule during the season, see how that works. Or make a rule where picks can't be dealt during the season, see if that gets any support.

that is not good for the league....teams now get to play you w/o Priest for the rest of the season when they normally wouldn't...and have to play the other team with Priest when they normally wouldn't

Really, this goes back to the general concept, that except for collusion, trades should be allowed.If a team gives up Priest early, the power shift has still happened. Don't forget two things, first it's the playoffs that matter - whether the trade happens right before or in the pre season, the playoffs remain the same; second, if the guy is out of contention, his opponents have won most of the time before the trade anyway.

 

[-OZ-]

As much as we like to think different, no team has an obligation to try and win as much as possible this year. If that were true, nobody would trade for picks or most rookies. You have an obligation to start your best lineup, and make your team the best overall, according to your strategy.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

pre or post season is ok....just not before the playoffs

Then make a "no trade" rule during the season, see how that works. Or make a rule where picks can't be dealt during the season, see if that gets any support.

that is not good for the league....teams now get to play you w/o Priest for the rest of the season when they normally wouldn't...and have to play the other team with Priest when they normally wouldn't

Really, this goes back to the general concept, that except for collusion, trades should be allowed.If a team gives up Priest early, the power shift has still happened. Don't forget two things, first it's the playoffs that matter - whether the trade happens right before or in the pre season, the playoffs remain the same; second, if the guy is out of contention, his opponents have won most of the time before the trade anyway.

with regard to your two first suggestions.....exactly....that is what I am trying to get across....possibly a "no trade involving future picks after week 5 rule"....everybody is still in contention....straight up trades not involving future picks are ok up until week 10 or whatever....what you should try to avoid is having a team that is out of contention having a firesale but still having several important/playoff impact games left against other teams....they had Priest all year and maybe had a few critical victories over potential playoff teams...now they are playing some more potential playoff teams without Priest.....and they didn't replace Priest with an impact player...all they have are some fiture picks in their pocket...and you now also have a team that is poised for a playoff run...adding a player of Priest's calibur from a firesale...playing the remainder of the schedule and the playoffs with him....in addition to not having to lose anything of even close to equal value to him off of his roster at that current time....

 

[purplehaze67]

....because as I said if you are trying to maintain a balance between the obligation to try and win this year and allowing you room to try and improve for future years....

This seems to be the key point in this debate. I see no obligation as a franchise owner to balance this year vs. future years. I may dump all my picks for the next two years in a major attempt to win now, or I may trade my vets for picks in an attempt to win later. Both are viable and valid from my perspective. I would not want to play in a league which handcuffed my attempts to take either position, but I do understand and respect those that feel differently.

 

[jurb26]

....because as I said if you are trying to maintain a balance between the obligation to try and win this year and allowing you room to try and improve for future years....

This seems to be the key point in this debate. I see no obligation as a franchise owner to balance this year vs. future years. I may dump all my picks for the next two years in a major attempt to win now, or I may trade my vets for picks in an attempt to win later. Both are viable and valid from my perspective. I would not want to play in a league which handcuffed my attempts to take either position, but I do understand and respect those that feel differently.

I agree this seems to be the center of the disagreement. Only took us 4 jpages to get there. My opinion is that you should try to win every year. Of course you have to be realistic and try to balance both current and future teams. Regarless, remaining competetive at all times should be the goal IMO. Not just seasons you are getting the breaks or doing well.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

....because as I said if you are trying to maintain a balance between the obligation to try and win this year and allowing you room to try and improve for future years....

This seems to be the key point in this debate. I see no obligation as a franchise owner to balance this year vs. future years. I may dump all my picks for the next two years in a major attempt to win now, or I may trade my vets for picks in an attempt to win later. Both are viable and valid from my perspective. I would not want to play in a league which handcuffed my attempts to take either position, but I do understand and respect those that feel differently.

the debate is not whether or not to allow you to do so ...it is should a firesale by a non contending team involving only future picks to that team be allowed right before the playoffs....with a contending team getting a player like Priest....

 

[purplehaze67]

I agree this seems to be the center of the disagreement. Only took us 4 jpages to get there.

My opinion is that you should try to win every year. Of course you have to be realistic and try to balance both current and future teams. Regarless, remaining competetive at all times should be the goal IMO. Not just seasons you are getting the breaks or doing well.

But trying to win takes many different forms. Everything from submitting your best lineup every week to scouring the waiver wire to trading for immediate help all fall into the bucket of trying to win. I expect all teams to submit their best lineup.

I'd hope that all remain active on the waiver wire (as long as there is not a monetary cost associated with each pickup) but I'm aware that human nature says that some will not.

I do not expect a team that has decided that they are not primed for a run this year to trade for immediate help.

But hey, there are a ton of different leagues all with various takes on rules. As long as we all end up playing where we are comfortable, who really cares? I'll find leagues that have liberal trading rules, and those that disagree with me will find leagues that are more restrictive in that aspect. Cool by me.

 

[purplehaze67]

....because as I said if you are trying to maintain a balance between the obligation to try and win this year and allowing you room to try and improve for future years....

This seems to be the key point in this debate. I see no obligation as a franchise owner to balance this year vs. future years. I may dump all my picks for the next two years in a major attempt to win now, or I may trade my vets for picks in an attempt to win later. Both are viable and valid from my perspective. I would not want to play in a league which handcuffed my attempts to take either position, but I do understand and respect those that feel differently.

the debate is not whether or not to allow you to do so ...it is should a firesale by a non contending team involving only future picks to that team be allowed right before the playoffs....with a contending team getting a player like Priest....

Not sure I understand the dichotomy, but I say "yes". As long as all parties enter the deal with the sincere aim of bettering thier team (in whatever definition they use), cool by me.

 

[-OZ-]

Just to throw a hypothetical out there.Let's say a team is eliminated from the playoffs, trade deadline hasn't come yet.He has Brett Favre, Preist Holmes, Curtis Martin, Jerry Rice, and Michael Strahan.All are having decent years, but aren't enough for him to compete (he just doesn't have depth). All of these have officially announced they are retiring at the end of the season. Would anyone really complain if the team traded all of these guys to the highest bidder in a "firesale"?

 

[jurb26]

Just to throw a hypothetical out there.

Let's say a team is eliminated from the playoffs, trade deadline hasn't come yet.

He has Brett Favre, Preist Holmes, Curtis Martin, Jerry Rice, and Michael Strahan.

All are having decent years, but aren't enough for him to compete (he just doesn't have depth). All of these have officially announced they are retiring at the end of the season.

Would anyone really complain if the team traded all of these guys to the highest bidder in a "firesale"?

In the case of SURE retirement or career ending, no. I would not have any problems at all with it. This falls under the catagory of sudden and unexpected news to me... similar to that of injuries. I just want to be clear about something here. I do not have a "problem" with it either way. Rules are rules and they should simply be followed in any league, however they choose to run it. I simply think that ethically it is safer and better to use a trade deadline. I play in leagues that are run both ways though. you just have to change your strat a bit is all. Just like a new scoring system.

 

[ExtraPoint]

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!

The only thing that is skewed is your values of players. You want to value the player in a dynasty league the same as you would in a redraft. That's like valueing player the same in a touchdown only league as it is in a yardage league. You have to learn to value a player according the rules. The rules of a dynasty league are that you dont lose players after a season is over. Therefore the value of players is not contigent on only one season. Its contigent on the rest of their careers.The balance isnt skewed at all. Everybody has the opportunity to trade players. If you didnt, you would be limited to rookie drafts and free agency. In which case the league would suck. Trying to build a dynasty team with only rookie picks and free agents would only serve to worsen competative balance.

Bottum line is that the people argueing against their self labeled 'fire-sales' are those who want every league to be like a redraft league. Dynasty leagues arent redrafts. Learn to play dynasty or stick to redrafts. Dont get angry and blame everyone else who actually understand the dynasty concept.

 

[ExtraPoint]

One player doesnt win a championship. The loss of one player doesnt cause a team to forfeit any games. The same is true of two or three players. In a 5 year dynasty league we've had 5 different champions. The team who scored the most points during the season has only won the title one time. It has a 13 week regular season and even the worst team won 4 games. I've played in a number of dynasty leagues all of which have allowed the types of trades described here. Not one time can I remember one of those older players being the difference maker in points on the road to a championship. Most of the time it doesnt even have an effect on the team's record who traded the older player away. The vocal minority here is just being resistant to the rules and concept of dynasty leagues. The more you learn to adjust your game instead of blaming others, the better you'll be able to compete.

 

[Erin Go Bragh]

The vocal minority part is important to note - I'm glad this had a poll attached to it so that we can see that despite the commentary being fairly evenly split, it's due to a very vocal minority instead of being an indication that opinions are fairly evenly split.

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....

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%.

All this "You wouldn't do the trade if you were still in contention this year" is a load of garbage. There is a guy in my 16 team dynasty league who is a good owner. He has won nearly 60% of his games in the five years the league ahs been around and has never failed to make the payoffs. He announced today that he is ready to "blow up" his team to try and get a younger group of players that can all grow and hopefully peak together. The reason is that, while he is competitive, he does not have the true firepower to challenge the top few teams in the league. Sure he makes the playoffs, but he knows that the odds are vastly against him when he faces the two or three truly elite teams in the playoffs. He is doing a firesale in March for crying out loud...and you know what...I fully support the move. If he sees that this group isn't good enough to get the ultimate prize, better to sell them off now and re-tool than to watch them all get old together.Is he tanking? I say no. Even though the likelihood is that he will win fewer games this year if he kept his core, he is trying to do what should be the ultimate goal of any dyansty owner...build a team that is good enough to bring home at least one title. IMO, it is better to win one title and miss the playoffs for nine years than to make the playoffs for a decade and never win the big one. Second place is first loser.

These are some of the players he is looking to deal:

Favre, Brett GBP QB

Dunn, Warrick ATL RB

James, Edgerrin IND RB

Moulds, Eric BUF WR

Stokley, Brandon IND WR

Alexander, Stephen DEN TE

Taylor, Jason MIA DE

Coakley, Dexter STL LB

Thornton, David IND LB

Wilson, Adrian ARI S

Would I relish one of my division opponents acquiring Edge? Hell no...but I know that team will have to leverage some of it's future in order to get him. I don't blame anyone who goes for the one year brass ring, provided that they are not looking to quit if they weaken their team in the future. One guy took over a team in our league a couple years ago and remade a mediocre team into league champs and has struggled ever since but I have utmost respect for him because he works the waiver wire harder than anyone I know and is always trying to use his resources to improve his roster. He's no quitter and he's been in the league less time than a lot of owners who have no titles.

Bottom line is that these type of firesales DO happen even before the season starts. Seems like those taking the moral high ground in here would have to call this owner a tanker because he is lessening his chance to win games this year if he trades some of these palyers for unproven youth and future draft picks.

 

[illusionist]

YES Exactly Stinkin Ref. You have it right on!!! That is the reason why we have this rule "The Trade deadline is week 10 of the regular season. Therefore, final trades can be made 24 hours BEFORE the deadline of week 10’s lineup is due. Also, once a team is eliminated from playoffs, that team cannot make trades, unless it involves another team that is also eliminated from the playoff as well."This stops all tanking and keeps the integrity of the league intact. If we didn't do this then we would have the same teams ALWAYS on top. I should know, I was one of those top teams that always traded with the teams that were out of it. To get better talent and used that talent to get to the big dance. Also, it gave me the edge being able to keep better talent year in and year out while others kept getting younger guys.It is just UNJUST and boring having an unbalanced league. Just my opinion. Keep the league competitive and you have a better league.

 

[CalBear]

YES Exactly Stinkin Ref. You have it right on!!!

That is the reason why we have this rule "The Trade deadline is week 10 of the regular season. Therefore, final trades can be made 24 hours BEFORE the deadline of week 10’s lineup is due. Also, once a team is eliminated from playoffs, that team cannot make trades, unless it involves another team that is also eliminated from the playoff as well."

This stops all tanking and keeps the integrity of the league intact. If we didn't do this then we would have the same teams ALWAYS on top. I should know, I was one of those top teams that always traded with the teams that were out of it. To get better talent and used that talent to get to the big dance. Also, it gave me the edge being able to keep better talent year in and year out while others kept getting younger guys.

It is just UNJUST and boring having an unbalanced league. Just my opinion. Keep the league competitive and you have a better league.

Go back and re-read the original scenario; the scenario is a league which has a trade deadline, and this trade is before the deadline.

 

[Biabreakable]

I am not sure if any one else has previously mentioned this as this thread is quite long, however I think it is important to consider that a team trading a quality player to another team with a winning record for draft picks, that those draft picks will not be very high in the order. And if the player traded away does make this team stronger the effect will depreciate the value of the draft picks recieved as well.The main value and the question about this being tanking has to do with the projected improvement of draft position of team A's picks. Because they will have a less viable starter to finish the season with than they did before.I do not consider that unethical as long as the team continues to field thier best lineup for the remainder of the season. I consider it good strategy and ownership to sacrifice short term competitiveness for long term improvement.I frequently look for teams with rosters that appear weak and attempt to trade quality players to them for thier draft picks in the hope of securing a high pick in the following year while simultaniously improving thier competitiveness short term against the rest of the field. But honestly such teams would be better served going the other direction. Although I have certainly miscalculated this before and had it blow up in my face, leaving me with dud picks the following year.

 

[illusionist]

YES Exactly Stinkin Ref.  You have it right on!!! 

That is the reason why we have this rule "The Trade deadline is week 10 of the regular season.  Therefore, final trades can be made 24 hours BEFORE the deadline of week 10’s lineup is due.  Also, once a team is eliminated from playoffs, that team cannot make trades, unless it involves another team that is also eliminated from the playoff as well."

This stops all tanking and keeps the integrity of the league intact.  If we didn't do this then we would have the same teams ALWAYS on top.  I should know, I was one of those top teams that always traded with the teams that were out of it.  To get better talent and used that talent to get to the big dance.  Also, it gave me the edge being able to keep better talent year in and year out while others kept getting younger guys.

It is just UNJUST  and boring having an unbalanced league.  Just my opinion.  Keep the league competitive and you have a better league.

Go back and re-read the original scenario; the scenario is a league which has a trade deadline, and this trade is before the deadline.

Ya that's what I'm saying. Before our league changed the rule to "we can't trade if we are eliminated", I was team B. This threw the whole league out of competitiveness year after year. 2 or 3 teams kept getting stronger while the other 9 or 10 teams got weaker. By the way, I'm the commish of this league and enforced this rule to keep the leauge competitive and balanced.

 

[-OZ-]

YES Exactly Stinkin Ref. You have it right on!!!

That is the reason why we have this rule "The Trade deadline is week 10 of the regular season. Therefore, final trades can be made 24 hours BEFORE the deadline of week 10’s lineup is due. Also, once a team is eliminated from playoffs, that team cannot make trades, unless it involves another team that is also eliminated from the playoff as well."

This stops all tanking and keeps the integrity of the league intact. If we didn't do this then we would have the same teams ALWAYS on top. I should know, I was one of those top teams that always traded with the teams that were out of it. To get better talent and used that talent to get to the big dance. Also, it gave me the edge being able to keep better talent year in and year out while others kept getting younger guys.

It is just UNJUST and boring having an unbalanced league. Just my opinion. Keep the league competitive and you have a better league.

Go back and re-read the original scenario; the scenario is a league which has a trade deadline, and this trade is before the deadline.

Ya that's what I'm saying. Before our league changed the rule to "we can't trade if we are eliminated", I was team B. This threw the whole league out of competitiveness year after year. 2 or 3 teams kept getting stronger while the other 9 or 10 teams got weaker. By the way, I'm the commish of this league and enforced this rule to keep the leauge competitive and balanced.

Just curious, if a team is within one loss of being eliminated, can they hold a "fire sale"? How about if it's week 5 and they're 0-5?

Week 4? 0-4?

Week 1, and their top players have gone on IR already?

Pre-season and their team "sucks"?

If it's a "hard line", a team can still do what a few people think is unethical, and give up early. If not, how do you judge?

 

[Stinkin Ref]

The vocal minority part is important to note - I'm glad this had a poll attached to it so that we can see that despite the commentary being fairly evenly split, it's due to a very vocal minority instead of being an indication that opinions are fairly evenly split.

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....

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%.

All this "You wouldn't do the trade if you were still in contention this year" is a load of garbage. There is a guy in my 16 team dynasty league who is a good owner. He has won nearly 60% of his games in the five years the league ahs been around and has never failed to make the payoffs. He announced today that he is ready to "blow up" his team to try and get a younger group of players that can all grow and hopefully peak together. The reason is that, while he is competitive, he does not have the true firepower to challenge the top few teams in the league. Sure he makes the playoffs, but he knows that the odds are vastly against him when he faces the two or three truly elite teams in the playoffs. He is doing a firesale in March for crying out loud...and you know what...I fully support the move. If he sees that this group isn't good enough to get the ultimate prize, better to sell them off now and re-tool than to watch them all get old together.Is he tanking? I say no. Even though the likelihood is that he will win fewer games this year if he kept his core, he is trying to do what should be the ultimate goal of any dyansty owner...build a team that is good enough to bring home at least one title. IMO, it is better to win one title and miss the playoffs for nine years than to make the playoffs for a decade and never win the big one. Second place is first loser.

These are some of the players he is looking to deal:

Favre, Brett GBP QB

Dunn, Warrick ATL RB

James, Edgerrin IND RB

Moulds, Eric BUF WR

Stokley, Brandon IND WR

Alexander, Stephen DEN TE

Taylor, Jason MIA DE

Coakley, Dexter STL LB

Thornton, David IND LB

Wilson, Adrian ARI S

Would I relish one of my division opponents acquiring Edge? Hell no...but I know that team will have to leverage some of it's future in order to get him. I don't blame anyone who goes for the one year brass ring, provided that they are not looking to quit if they weaken their team in the future. One guy took over a team in our league a couple years ago and remade a mediocre team into league champs and has struggled ever since but I have utmost respect for him because he works the waiver wire harder than anyone I know and is always trying to use his resources to improve his roster. He's no quitter and he's been in the league less time than a lot of owners who have no titles.

Bottom line is that these type of firesales DO happen even before the season starts. Seems like those taking the moral high ground in here would have to call this owner a tanker because he is lessening his chance to win games this year if he trades some of these palyers for unproven youth and future draft picks.

this has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.....trade all you want in March....

 

[Drugrunner]

This might be the most lop sided poll in the history of FBGs.

 

[Keg]

one of the main things that Stinkin Ref kept harping on was the trade deadline...i would wonder what he would have to say if a team decided to tear down and start rebuilding in the MARCH time frame?

i posted Chronicles of an IDP Rebuild in the IDP forum last yr(it is LOOOOONG)

a select few in my league(16 team dynasty IDP league with CONTRACTS and Fake Cash with a rookie taxi squad(DTS)) said i was tanking...the commishes ended up saying that I wasnt tanking....

now with that said I did end up starting a couple of players that were made inactive just prior to the start of a few games(this i was unaware of and once i realized it they didnt hit my lineup again)

well now we are in our rules review month and as a league we/they are trying to come up with ways to curb what i did....if you dont want to read the Chronicles thread this in a nutshell is what i did...

I basically sold off all of my players with 1 yr contracts since i didnt think i had a team that could compete for the Super Bowl...we have Restricted Free Agency and i banked a ton of cash to help with my rebuild...in the end I also ended up as the worst team and have pick 1.1(even if i didnt own my own 1st rounder it would not have changed my strategy)...

so my question is after you read or glance over my Chronicles Thread would you consider what I did tanking?

If no, why?

If yes, Why?

i just compiled the trades i did by month:

March 7

April 1

May 6

June 2

July 1

August 3

September 1

October 6

November 1

TOTAL 29 Trades

someone earlier in the thread questioned the use of Fire Sale and I agree with them that in a Fire Sale you arent getting good value...i think I got very good value on most of my trades(only 2 i look back on that I would like a do-over on)

also fwiw Jene Bramel thought enough of my Chronicles Thread to put it in the FAQs in the IDP forum

 

[Keg]

well since the bump 7 more votes for not tanking and just 1 more vote for tanking...

i was really hoping that some additional discussion would have taken place from the scenario i posted about my situation

 

[Dr. Evil]

I think the question has been answered.

Out of 168 votes, there are only 11 that think it is unethical. You don't even have enough votes for unethical to make a 12 team league.

 

[Keg]

I think the question has been answered.Out of 168 votes, there are only 11 that think it is unethical. You don't even have enough votes for unethical to make a 12 team league.

that is pretty funny(seriously) but rather then start a new thread I thought i would post my scenario which is a bit different then the OPi did a complete tear down and rebuild starting in March and it continued the entire season(i only won 2 games but one was against the eventual Super Bowl Champ ) and I was curious how people in a dynasty league would feel about the strategy I used

 

[duaneok66]

one of the best threads ever . . .

 

[KellysHeroes]

wow... a 2 yr old thread

can we kill this now

 

[Dr. Evil]

I think the question has been answered.Out of 168 votes, there are only 11 that think it is unethical. You don't even have enough votes for unethical to make a 12 team league.

that is pretty funny(seriously) but rather then start a new thread I thought i would post my scenario which is a bit different then the OPi did a complete tear down and rebuild starting in March and it continued the entire season(i only won 2 games but one was against the eventual Super Bowl Champ ) and I was curious how people in a dynasty league would feel about the strategy I used

I have absolutely no problem with it. Until I changed my drafting strategies, I was having to do the same thing in year 2 of my first two dynasty leagues. It is a legitimate strategy to building a healthier team. It does have an impact on other teams in the league, but so would your team always being in the basement.Obviously, in a league that isn't a dynasty format, such trading would and should get you lynched. But in a dynasty league it is a legitimate and effective way to rebuild.

 

[Keg]

wow... a 2 yr old threadcan we kill this now

it may be a 2 yr old thread but it substantially has the same value today as it did 2 yrs agoand fwiw there may be others facing something like this and may find this thread valuable to their league