Dynasty League Dispute - Please give your input (1 Viewer)

[Lott's Fingertip]

Yay, a dynasty league dispute. I appreciate any input you may have.I am in a 12 team dynasty league entering its 5th year. We have a rule that says an owner must submit their best lineup at all times. No losing on purpose. Pretty standard, just about every dynasty league has this rule.We have 20 man rosters, plus a 5 man rookie squad. Players on the active roster can have up to 4 year contracts. Rookies on the RS obviously do not have contracts and can be given a contract when activated, which is usually the following season.An owner blew up his team this offseason, trading all his good players for mostly 2012/2013 rookie picks. His strategy is obviously to suck this year, get a high pick next year, and have a great nucleus of players going forward in 2013 onward. Additionally, he has acquired free agent money that rolls over every year, so he is going to be able to pick up 2 excellent vets in our restricted free agency next year.A few owners believe he should be required to activate Doug Martin and Trent Richardson and give them contracts right now so that he is more competitive.One owner even said

If your team is stocked, and you have great rookies, then of course you shouldn't have to give them contracts, but this is not the case.

I am not either of these owners, but I think that this is unfair. The rookie squad is there to develop rookies so that you have them over most of their useful life. It would seem like it would be hard to determine which rookies on which teams HAVE to be activated, and it would shorten the window for this bad team to be competitive.Activating these two players would make a team that is likely going to win 0-2 games into a team that is going to win 0-4 games (generously).What are your thoughts, Shark Pool?

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

Any thoughts? It would really be helpful, and this is a concept that applies to most dynasty leagues.

 

[bigums]

Unless there's something specifically written about forced activations, I don't think you can do that. Especially since it will be someone else besides the owner setting "value" based on their own projections.

If you've ever had a rookie stashed away on any team in the 5 years that outplayed even the lowest benchwarmer on a team, I think there's no argument for enforcing this policy.

 

[Amused to Death]

Without giving this a ton of thought, my initial reaction is no - he should be able to leave his stud rookies on the RS until he's ready to activate them. I say this because your rules say (if I read it right) you have a player for a max of 4 years after activating them. Its the owner's decision to start the clock when he's ready. You're not always playing for this year in a dynasty. Let the owner manage his team.

 

[todd mcshay]

He should have to play his best active team.

 

[jwb]

How did Mcfadden, Moreno, Crabby, Spiller, etc etc etc do their rookie year? What makes anyone so certain that Trent and Martin will be studs right off the bat? At least certain enough to force someone to do something like this. There's no such thing as "great rookies" before the season even starts.

I say no - he should not have to activate anyone.

 

[whatadai]

That's stupid...a lot of people thought Ingram would ball. You're basically forcing an owner into starting very questionable and unproven players. Not only that...you're making contract decisions for him. The owners who are trying to push for such a thing just want Richardson and Martin in their prime.

 

[BoltzNBrew]

How did Mcfadden, Moreno, Crabby, Spiller, etc etc etc do their rookie year? What makes anyone so certain that Trent and Martin will be studs right off the bat? At least certain enough to force someone to do something like this. There's no such thing as "great rookies" before the season even starts.I say no - he should not have to activate anyone.

This. If there is no rule stating he has to start them he should be allowed to leave them on the Rookie Squad regardless of how crappy the rest of his team is.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

This seems like the Nat's not playing Harper until after June this year so his years of service didn't kick in earlier. Think you have to allow him to keep rooks on the taxi squad.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

He should have to play his best active team.

Is this actually Todd mcshay ?

 

[sbonomo]

Without giving this a ton of thought, my initial reaction is no - he should be able to leave his stud rookies on the RS until he's ready to activate them. I say this because your rules say (if I read it right) you have a player for a max of 4 years after activating them. Its the owner's decision to start the clock when he's ready. You're not always playing for this year in a dynasty. Let the owner manage his team.

x2 - there is way too much subjectivity if you don't do this. Tell the other guys in your league to chill and let this guy rebuild.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Without giving this a ton of thought, my initial reaction is no - he should be able to leave his stud rookies on the RS until he's ready to activate them. I say this because your rules say (if I read it right) you have a player for a max of 4 years after activating them. Its the owner's decision to start the clock when he's ready. You're not always playing for this year in a dynasty. Let the owner manage his team.

/thread.

 

[Chazzhawk]

It sounds like this guy has a long term plan and is trying to go with it, and since it looks like it might work (based on some of the rookies he already has) the rest of the owners in your league are getting scared and want to try to ruin his plan in a cheap and petty way. If I was this owner I would ask for a refund and leave the league, sounds like a group of spoiled brats. Side note this guy sounds like a solid owner, in it for the long haul willing to rebuild, and he is smart about it. Shame on the people in this league

 

[Amused to Death]

It sounds like this guy has a long term plan and is trying to go with it, and since it looks like it might work (based on some of the rookies he already has) the rest of the owners in your league are getting scared and want to try to ruin his plan in a cheap and petty way. If I was this owner I would ask for a refund and leave the league, sounds like a group of spoiled brats. Side note this guy sounds like a solid owner, in it for the long haul willing to rebuild, and he is smart about it. Shame on the people in this league

Your post is a bit more harsh than I would word it, but yeah...its a legit dynasty strategy. Its one aspect that separates it from redrafts. Its not about winning the league this year, its about winning multiple years. Other owners should worry about their team.Anyway, it looks like the OP got his answer.

 

[strong]

i wonder if lott's fingertip is the only yes vote.

 

[Crazy Tony]

Chazzhawk is the whiney i want my money back owner. That's funny to me.

He should not have to start Rookies. Even if they're better than his current starting line up.

He should be required to put the best 20man roster out there each week and start his best line up.

We call this the NO-Tanking rule.

When in doubt...if it's determined that a player might be tanking....or not setting their line-up. We go with the #1 Projected available player...i.e. Yahoo...projected player...for that week off their bench.

If the move is suspect.... Dropping a legit player to pick up a scrub... that player might be asked the reasoning behind it. Maybe they have reason to believe he'll do poorly. As long as there's a valid reason other than...i'm trying to lose. We have to go with it.

This Owner traded away all of this good players for picks. If the other owner's don't like that they should not have traded their picks away.

Besides. I heard that the 2013 draft will suck.

I would issue a message stating, there's nothing in the rules that can make this manager activate rookies. The league is allowed to put it to a vote for the following season. this manager's strategy is allowed however he will closely be watched throughout the season and will be required to put the best, most competitive line-up in out there each and every week. Otherwise he's fined or risks losing his RD1 pick the next year ro something.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

i wonder if lott's fingertip is the only yes vote.

Nope.From my original post:

I am not either of these owners, but I think that this is unfair. The rookie squad is there to develop rookies so that you have them over most of their useful life. It would seem like it would be hard to determine which rookies on which teams HAVE to be activated, and it would shorten the window for this bad team to be competitive.

I'm the guy in the league that writes a novel defending my position logically when an issue is what I believe to be an important one. It is annoying to do this, but sometimes things get pushed through without thinking about unintended consequences in the future. I kind of have a feeling that the people on the other side of the issue (whatever that issue may be) don't like that. I find that ridiculous, I will support my opinion with these facts, I will refute your assertions with the same facts if your assertions are not factually based. You should do the same. So I wanted to get some third party input on this issue, since it really isn't a league-specific concept.Thanks to all that have participated.

 

[Mario Kart]

Seems like a good strategy to me. He's donating money right now so whomever wins should be fine with this. He is also banking on the league being around for the next few years.

 

[bjlmonster]

I for one hate a "start your best team" rule in Dynasty. If a team wants to tank to improve their future position that is fine with me, I can win their donation. Yeah could they tank and leave the league sure, that is why you have rules about teams trading picks must pay a year in advance to ensure they don't leave you high and dry.

As for the question at hand. It is their rookie squad and nobody has the right to tell them when to activate. They should play their best ACTIVE lineup each week and that should meet your rule requirements.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

Word to the wise: Have a lawyer draft your dynasty league rules.

 

[JoeSteeler]

I for one hate a "start your best team" rule in Dynasty. If a team wants to tank to improve their future position that is fine with me, I can win their donation. Yeah could they tank and leave the league sure, that is why you have rules about teams trading picks must pay a year in advance to ensure they don't leave you high and dry.

As for the question at hand. It is their rookie squad and nobody has the right to tell them when to activate. They should play their best ACTIVE lineup each week and that should meet your rule requirements.

 

[ae03440]

Like the earlier poster mentioned, this is surely happened before. Just look back over the past few years and find one example were an owner left a highly touted rookie with a high ADP on the rookie squad when that player would have been "considered" a better starter than another player on that team. I'm sure you'll find quite a few. Those examples alone should end this.

 

[renesauz]

He should be able to leave them on the RS, just as your rules clearly intended.

 

[Amused to Death]

League-mates that know how to run your team better than you are awesome. Always willing to help you make decisions in your best interest. They just never seem to offer to help pay your entry fee when it's due.

I see 3 of the compainers have voted.