Ethics issue (trading pick slots, teams) (1 Viewer)

[ghostguy123]

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

 

[ghostguy123]

A trade needs to be for fantasy assets only that are allowed to be traded, and with an honest expectation by each owner that his team's gametime efforts benefit from the trade.

Exactly what I said only a few posts ago.

If the trade is done within the constraints of league rules/finances, I have no issue with it.

A 2nd and 3rd for a 1st you say? Have at it.

$500 cash for a 1st? (Or to swap teams) Bzzzzt!

It’s the most basic element of this question, and everything else is window dressing. The biggest issue is that it devalues actual league assets in favor of cash on the side. Who’s gonna lose a 2nd round pick of you can just slip a C-note in my pocket on the side?

How is this even a question?

I have no problem with someone not allowing this kind of scenario to take place.

However, responses like this I take exception to, because your examples are not part of the scenario.
I mean, you say "$500 for a 1st??". Well, that not part of the scenario.

You say it devalues league assets? No it does not. Nothing changes except who owns which team.

So be against it if you want, but at least correctly understand what you are being against.

 

[GregR]

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

 

[ghostguy123]

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

 

[Amused to Death]

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

For money.

 

[GregR]

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

See my first post. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes over a team they choose to give up. If your league has rules that let you sell your team, then you need to go through that process and not resort to using fantasy trades to accomplish it.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I have no problem with someone not allowing this kind of scenario to take place.

However, responses like this I take exception to, because your examples are not part of the scenario.
I mean, you say "$500 for a 1st??". Well, that not part of the scenario.

You say it devalues league assets? No it does not. Nothing changes except who owns which team.

So be against it if you want, but at least correctly understand what you are being against.

But it is part of the scenario. That 1st round pick necessarily gets dealt along with the rest, right?

And it sets up a dangerous precedent that I outlined in my post.

In the future, and based on this selling of all picks, other teams have a damn good case to say that they too can simply pay another owner cash to gain an asset (player, pick, tender back massage, etc)

Making cash an option along side picks or players for trades is a Pandora’s box of f**kery.

Your proposed scenario is merely the 1st domino pushed over in what ruins the league’s asset value system. How can you not at least acknowledge this?

 

[ghostguy123]

C

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

For money.

Correct

 

[ghostguy123]

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

See my first post. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes over a team they choose to give up. If your league has rules that let you sell your team, then you need to go through that process and not resort to using fantasy trades to accomplish it.

I never said do any secret backdoor deals. I said if this was presented in your league, yay or nay? There doesn't need to be any rules for or against it. If everyone is cool with it, cool it happens. If not, cool, it doesn't happen.
If you say nay, ok, though some of the responses here lead me to believe people are saying nay to scenario that isn't even being presented.

 

[Amused to Death]

C

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

For money.

Correct

So in essence, as I've pointed out before, your thread title is egregiously misleading. There is not "trade", its a "sale". Your hypothetical is selling a draft slot. Not because one team thinks they're improving their chances of winning - they're selling an asset for profit. Otherwise, just trade the picks.

 

[ghostguy123]

I have no problem with someone not allowing this kind of scenario to take place.

However, responses like this I take exception to, because your examples are not part of the scenario.
I mean, you say "$500 for a 1st??". Well, that not part of the scenario.

You say it devalues league assets? No it does not. Nothing changes except who owns which team.

So be against it if you want, but at least correctly understand what you are being against.

But it is part of the scenario. That 1st round pick necessarily gets dealt along with the rest, right?

And it sets up a dangerous precedent that I outlined in my post.

In the future, and based on this selling of all picks, other teams have a damn good case to say that they too can simply pay another owner cash to gain an asset (player, pick, tender back massage, etc)

Making cash an option along side picks or players for trades is a Pandora’s box of f**kery.

Your proposed scenario is merely the 1st domino pushed over in what ruins the league’s asset value system. How can you not at least acknowledge this?

I acknowledge anything is possible.
I also acknowledge that any league full of owners that see it that way we're going to try to do shady deals anyway, with or without either scenario ever happening.
Selling of picks for money is not allowed. Has never been allowed, can never be allowed.
Neither scenario changes anything about either franchise. Buying a pick would.

 

[ghostguy123]

C

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

For money.

Correct

So in essence, as I've pointed out before, your thread title is egregiously misleading. There is not "trade", its a "sale". Your hypothetical is selling a draft slot. Not because one team thinks they're improving their chances of winning - they're selling an asset for profit. Otherwise, just trade the picks.

I laid out the scenario. Title it how you wish.
Theoretically to do this it would be done on the website by offering a trade where all picks are swapped. Semantics

 

[CalBear]

Buying someone's pick was never an option, no idea why you even mention it. That was never presented

Isn’t buying someone’s draft position the same thing?

No.
We are talking about a startup draft. It's not at a the same.

Yes, a startup snake, not auction, correct?

So if you buy the draft position, you are drafting from a different slot, correct? You change where you pick for the entire start-up draft, correct?

Please explain the difference. I must be missing something.

ghostguy's point, which I think people are not really engaging with, is that from the perspective of the rest of the league, nothing changes. You drew the #2 pick, you still have the #2 pick. There's someone else ahead of you who has the #1 pick. From your team's perspective, it's no different than if the draft slot lottery came out differently. So I don't think there's a reasonable moral objection to the idea.

I do think the point that the league should be a closed system (no transactions other than those in the rules) is a reasonable one, but that's an issue of league parameters, not of collusion or ethics. I mean, auctioning the #1 draft spot is an entirely reasonable thing to do, but, not everyone may want to play in a league where the #1 draft spot is up for auction. It definitely feels like something outside of normal league parameters.

Say I'm the 1.10 guy and I'm going to reach for Gabe Davis at 4.2. Now I have the 1.1 pick and can get Davis at 4.12. The other teams are now competing against different rosters because money exchanged hands.

Why would you assume that the guy who had the 1.01 pick wasn't going to take Davis at 4.12?

The person at 1.01 will make choices about the players he drafts, and those choices will affect the rest of the league. That's how fantasy football works. As the player at 1.02 you don't have any control over it and you're not competitively disadvantaged by those choices.

 

[Amused to Death]

Theoretically to do this it would be done on the website by offering a trade where all picks are swapped. Semantics

And then once its accepted, one owner venmos money to the other, correct? That's a sale. A trade would be picks-for-picks where both sides enter in to it with the intention of improving their team.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Selling of picks for money is not allowed. Has never been allowed, can never be allowed.
Neither scenario changes anything about either franchise. Buying a pick would.

But you’re literally selling all the picks for money by trading draft slots…for money.

If it’s not allowed, and has never been allowed and never will be allowed, then you already know the answer.

 

[ghostguy123]

Buying someone's pick was never an option, no idea why you even mention it. That was never presented

Isn’t buying someone’s draft position the same thing?

No.
We are talking about a startup draft. It's not at a the same.

Yes, a startup snake, not auction, correct?

So if you buy the draft position, you are drafting from a different slot, correct? You change where you pick for the entire start-up draft, correct?

Please explain the difference. I must be missing something.

ghostguy's point, which I think people are not really engaging with, is that from the perspective of the rest of the league, nothing changes. You drew the #2 pick, you still have the #2 pick. There's someone else ahead of you who has the #1 pick. From your team's perspective, it's no different than if the draft slot lottery came out differently. So I don't think there's a reasonable moral objection to the idea.

I do think the point that the league should be a closed system (no transactions other than those in the rules) is a reasonable one, but that's an issue of league parameters, not of collusion or ethics. I mean, auctioning the #1 draft spot is an entirely reasonable thing to do, but, not everyone may want to play in a league where the #1 draft spot is up for auction. It definitely feels like something outside of normal league parameters.

Say I'm the 1.10 guy and I'm going to reach for Gabe Davis at 4.2. Now I have the 1.1 pick and can get Davis at 4.12. The other teams are now competing against different rosters because money exchanged hands.

Why would you assume that the guy who had the 1.01 pick wasn't going to take Davis at 4.12?

The person at 1.01 will make choices about the players he drafts, and those choices will affect the rest of the league. That's how fantasy football works. As the player at 1.02 you don't have any control over it and you're not competitively disadvantaged by those choices.

Yep. If two teams swap draft slots, they may both end up better than they would have. They both might end up worse.

 

[GregR]

C

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

For money.

Correct

So in essence, as I've pointed out before, your thread title is egregiously misleading. There is not "trade", its a "sale". Your hypothetical is selling a draft slot. Not because one team thinks they're improving their chances of winning - they're selling an asset for profit. Otherwise, just trade the picks.

I laid out the scenario. Title it how you wish.
Theoretically to do this it would be done on the website by offering a trade where all picks are swapped. Semantics

Does your league have rules allowing owners to sell their franchises?

Have you asked if owners can sell their franchises?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Yep. If two teams swap draft slots, they may both end up better than they would have. They both might end up worse.

But you already know one is more likely to end up better. Otherwise why would $ be involved?

I, and others, keep pointing this out.

 

[ghostguy123]

Selling of picks for money is not allowed. Has never been allowed, can never be allowed.
Neither scenario changes anything about either franchise. Buying a pick would.

But you’re literally selling all the picks for money by trading draft slots.

If it’s not allowed, and has never been allowed and never will be allowed, then you already know the answer.

Again, that is semantics.
What is really happening is the sale of two teams, and it happens to be to each other.
Same as scenario 2.

 

[ghostguy123]

Yep. If two teams swap draft slots, they may both end up better than they would have. They both might end up worse.

But you already know one is more likely to end up better. Otherwise why would $ be involved?

I, and others, keep pointing this out.

Well, duh, thats the idea, and I've never said otherwise.

 

[ghostguy123]

C

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

For money.

Correct

So in essence, as I've pointed out before, your thread title is egregiously misleading. There is not "trade", its a "sale". Your hypothetical is selling a draft slot. Not because one team thinks they're improving their chances of winning - they're selling an asset for profit. Otherwise, just trade the picks.

I laid out the scenario. Title it how you wish.
Theoretically to do this it would be done on the website by offering a trade where all picks are swapped. Semantics

Does your league have rules allowing owners to sell their franchises?

Have you asked if owners can sell their franchises?

FFPC has people selling their teams all the time.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Yep. If two teams swap draft slots, they may both end up better than they would have. They both might end up worse.

But you already know one is more likely to end up better. Otherwise why would $ be involved?

I, and others, keep pointing this out.

Well, duh, thats the idea, and I've never said otherwise.

Then please stop pretending it’s a neutral transaction where both owners could win an and everyone goes skipping through a field of wildflowers holding hands & singing a little ditty.

It’s payola for an advantage outside the constraints of league finances. e.g. collusion.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

FFPC has people selling their teams all the time.

Within the same league?

 

[GregR]

C

And let me quickly address a scenario I imagine someone will ask:

Owner 1: I paid my $500 fee, so I can do what I want with the team.

League: You are the owner for the team this season covered by the dues, yes. You can have a friend run the team for you if you want.

Owner 1: Ok so I'm going to run Owner 2's team and he's going to run mine.

League: No that would be collusion. Please see our well thought out rules which state an owner having undo control over a team other than his own is collusion and not allowed. You are Team 1's owner, you cannot be making decisions for other teams.

Nobody said anything about running someone else's teams. Once you switch ownership, you are now running your new team.

If the league has legal contracts that allow owners to sell teams, he can give up ownership of team 1, and he can obtain ownership of team 2. Which I don't think is the norm for fantasy leagues.

I'm saying if it isn't a special case that truly gives ownership in a commercially legal sense, then the owners can't just say "I'm going to control the other team". Because regardless of his desire, he's Team 1's owner. Most leagues don't allow owners to decide who takes their team if they give it up, as previously said.

Of course most leagues don't have this happen. That's not the point.
Let's say you just did three startup drafts and got the 11th pick every time. Well, you sign up for another startup and got the 11th slot yet AGAIN.
You are ticked, so you shoot a message out to the league that this is your 4th straight draft in this spot, and you would be willing to pay someone to swap draft slots. Possibly you negotiate with a couple teams and end up making a swap for a couple hundred bucks (500 league buy in let's say) to get the 3 slot in the snake draft.

Why in all blue hell are people gonna have such a problem with this that they throw a fit and quit the league or think this is COLLUSION of all things. It sure isn't collusion.

The draft hasn't even started yet. Nothing has changed except two owners swap their draft slots. Each franchise remains exactly the same.

I can't fathom not allowing two owners to do this regardless of who pays who, as it's not proving any sort of advantage that want previously there.

If an owner feels that getting all the picks from the 11 spot for all of his picks from the 4 slot are better, then you and he would do the trade.

If he is not willing to do that trade, then it means he thinks he would be worsening his team by making the trade. If you pay him to make a trade he believes worsens his team, then you are colluding with him.

It's not a secret deal. Everyone knows about it.
It's not deceitful. Everyone knows about it.
Where's the collusion?

It doesn't have to be secret to be collusion.

If he thinks the trade is advantageous, why do you need to pay him money?

It's not a "trade". It's a complete franchise swap.

For money.

Correct

So in essence, as I've pointed out before, your thread title is egregiously misleading. There is not "trade", its a "sale". Your hypothetical is selling a draft slot. Not because one team thinks they're improving their chances of winning - they're selling an asset for profit. Otherwise, just trade the picks.

I laid out the scenario. Title it how you wish.
Theoretically to do this it would be done on the website by offering a trade where all picks are swapped. Semantics

Does your league have rules allowing owners to sell their franchises?

Have you asked if owners can sell their franchises?

FFPC has people selling their teams all the time.

Then just sell the teams.

Doing a draft pick trade whose results would be the same as a sale of teams, is not the same as a sale of the teams. A trade is a trade and should be judged by the proper ethics rules for judging a trade. Which your trade fails.

If it is a sale of the team, then sell the team and go through any necessary steps to register with the league that the sale happened.

 

[GregR]

@ghostguy123

The problem is that once the league starts setting a precedent of real life money being exchanged in a fantasy trade, they are opening the door for trouble.

If you are a good owner for the league you'll stop trying to circumvent their processes with a trade, and just do an actual sale of the teams if it is allowed.

 

[ghostguy123]

Yep. If two teams swap draft slots, they may both end up better than they would have. They both might end up worse.

But you already know one is more likely to end up better. Otherwise why would $ be involved?

I, and others, keep pointing this out.

Well, duh, thats the idea, and I've never said otherwise.

Then please stop pretending it’s a neutral transaction where both owners could win an and everyone goes skipping through a field of wildflowers holding hands & singing a little ditty.

It’s payola for an advantage outside the constraints of league finances. e.g. collusion.

Which roster improves with the transaction?

 

[ghostguy123]

FFPC has people selling their teams all the time.

Within the same league?

Not sure if it has happened yet, but you absolutely can.
You can orphan a team on their website or sell on dynasty depot. If s different team in the league happens to be for sale wt a price you like, you can buy it.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Yep. If two teams swap draft slots, they may both end up better than they would have. They both might end up worse.

But you already know one is more likely to end up better. Otherwise why would $ be involved?

I, and others, keep pointing this out.

Well, duh, thats the idea, and I've never said otherwise.

Then please stop pretending it’s a neutral transaction where both owners could win an and everyone goes skipping through a field of wildflowers holding hands & singing a little ditty.

It’s payola for an advantage outside the constraints of league finances. e.g. collusion.

Which roster improves with the transaction?

Clearly the one paying money outside of league finances.

You just acknowledged this advantage.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

FFPC has people selling their teams all the time.

Within the same league?

Not sure if it has happened yet, but you absolutely can.
You can orphan a team on their website or sell on dynasty depot. If s different team in the league happens to be for sale wt a price you like, you can buy it.

Yikes.

 

[GregR]

So you're going to do that instead of making a trade?

 

[GregR]

Cringes about an owner having more than one team in the same league aside...

 

[ghostguy123]

Yep. If two teams swap draft slots, they may both end up better than they would have. They both might end up worse.

But you already know one is more likely to end up better. Otherwise why would $ be involved?

I, and others, keep pointing this out.

Well, duh, thats the idea, and I've never said otherwise.

Then please stop pretending it’s a neutral transaction where both owners could win an and everyone goes skipping through a field of wildflowers holding hands & singing a little ditty.

It’s payola for an advantage outside the constraints of league finances. e.g. collusion.

Which roster improves with the transaction?

Clearly the one paying money outside of league finances.

You just acknowledged this advantage.

The roster stays the same

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Yep. If two teams swap draft slots, they may both end up better than they would have. They both might end up worse.

But you already know one is more likely to end up better. Otherwise why would $ be involved?

I, and others, keep pointing this out.

Well, duh, thats the idea, and I've never said otherwise.

Then please stop pretending it’s a neutral transaction where both owners could win an and everyone goes skipping through a field of wildflowers holding hands & singing a little ditty.

It’s payola for an advantage outside the constraints of league finances. e.g. collusion.

Which roster improves with the transaction?

Clearly the one paying money outside of league finances.

You just acknowledged this advantage.

The roster stays the same

Now we’re going in circles again.

If you don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, there ya go.

I believe enough people have made enough of a case that this is in bad form.

It’s been an entertaining discussion though - the auctioning of roster spots for the entire league is probably your best route.

 

[GordonGekko]

Scenario 1. You enter a startup draft with a $500 buy in, and someone draws the #1 slot, and you draw the #10. They offer to swap draft slots with you (every pick except future picks) if you pay them 200 bucks.
Now, whether or not you would do it isn't the question. The question is, should this be allowed? I say absolutely yes, and can't see one single reason why it shouldn't be allowed. There is no competitive balance issue whatsoever.

Scenario 2. You are in an existing league. $500 buy in. You have an awesome team. Some other guys team sucks. He offers you $1000 to switch teams with him. Every player, every pick.....basically the only thing that changes is the owners swap spots. The question isn't whether or not you would do it. The question is, should it be allowed? I say absolutely yes, as no competitive balance issues are evident.
Someone said this is like trading players for money. No, it is VERY not like that. Trading players for money would be an obvious competitive balance issue. Swapping teams is not as the teams remain exactly the same as they were, just with new owners.

.....I never said do any secret backdoor deals. I said if this was presented in your league, yay or nay? There doesn't need to be any rules for or against it. If everyone is cool with it, cool it happens. If not, cool, it doesn't happen.

Most money leagues in fantasy don't use some type of service to hold the "league pot" Most of them work on the honor system with their Commissioner or whomever is designated to hold the money and handle the logistics of distribution of payouts at the end of the season.

If you are the Commissioner in your league in question, or the person in charge of distribution, many owners are going to silently wonder if you will eventually steal their money.

Money being stolen and fraud in expected payouts happens all the time in fantasy football. It likely happens far more than most people think. Most of us who have played long enough have experienced it firsthand at some point and in some version.

I'm not saying you are definitely the kind of person to steal money from a league. But even by asking the question to your league for their viewpoint on the issue will raise silent questions in private if you can be trusted or not with holding their money. No Trust = No Incentive To Stay.

The point of fantasy for most people is have some lighthearted fun and competition. You are dragging in real life drama, or potential drama or the kind of crap they will expect to get from their jobs or from their marriages.

This is when veteran fantasy owners see a Commish who keeps trying to game every angle and bend every little thing to the edge outside of good faith, that they decide it's time to find a new league. Because the trust is gone. The perception of trust is eroded to nothing.

You keep saying there are no rules against it. Well where are the rules for it? Most leagues will not enable changes that are voted upon until the next season. Most leagues will not take league fees, then vote on a change to be enacted that same season. Well, if there are leagues like that, I'd suggest no one play in those kind of leagues.

Whatever views you have for yourself on this is yours. But you are setting the conditions where good active engaged veteran fantasy owners will not want to play with you. If I was in your league and you suggested this, I wouldn't want to play with you. I'd say No to all your trade offers no matter the value involved. I wouldn't want to play with the other guy either. I'd look for the first exit possible and as soon as possible. If you want a better team, make better use of the league's internal 'currency system' and build a better damn team on your own sweat and toil.

Let's get real about this. Anyone who tries this is going to try to foist it onto a league for that current season after league fees have already been collected. Because it's taking in 200 or 1000 as real life cash in exchange for watching that league die. What is the value of 1.1 in a league that only has four owners left after the majority have exited because of this kind of situation being dragged into the fold in the next season?

No one who has played fantasy long enough can practically believe that the majority of good engaged active owners are going to tolerate this and stay in that league.

You keep saying nothing is wrong here. What you aren't discussing is how to structure something like this for the long haul in an actual league constitution. You aren't doing that because you already know doing it will effectively kill that league.

 

[wlwiles]

Just got told a story last night that made me think of Scenario 1 in this thread.

Good buddy of mine gets a trade offer in a 10 year long dynasty league of his. My buddy has Jamarr Chase, another owner has Jefferson and is a Bengals fan. Dude offers Jefferson for Chase straight up. My buddy rejects. They go back and forth, JJ owner adds a 5th on top but my buddy counters with JJ + 2.10. Guy declines, offers Richie James instead. Another decline. They chat. It's one of those situations where both guys agree the deal is 100% fair straight up, it's just that they both prefer the same side of it. JJ owner wants Chase but doesn't want to hurt his team (by paying more picks/players) in any way to get the deal done, and thinks that if he overpays it'll get vetoed or accusations of collusion will get thrown around.

Then the next day the JJ owner says "ok ok, Jefferson and a bottle of Weller, final offer". My buddy is the commish and called me to explain the story and ask if he should boot the guy from the league. The guy says it was a joke offer. But my buddy is seriously considering replacing him now.


That's all it takes to start to unravel the integrity of a league. One guy offering $ outside of the league kitty, whether it's secret $ or it's announced in the league chat. Once you introduce the possibility of someone using non-league buy-in money to maneuver within the league, you better have a long long list of iron-clad rules that ALL owners agree and swear to, or you put the whole league on that slippery slope everyone's been talking about for 6 pages.

Scenario #1 can't happen. Wouldn't fly in any league I am in, and I'd likely leave the league if I found out that it had happened.

 

[GordonGekko]

And yes I want to play with that guy, and I hope he makes cash offers for my team every year.

If this is a league that allows two co-owners of the same single "franchise", then why not become co-owners?

You can do the work to build that team, make trades, draft, research, sit for waivers, etc, etc. and he can set the lineups and take the glory if the "franchise" wins a championship. If he chooses to pay you in real life cash in private to do it, then so be it.

You'd have a better chance of proposing for the potential of two "co-owners" for a single league "franchise" (if that's not possible right now) into an actual league constitution, than for what you are proposing in the entire OP.

 

[Amused to Death]

For the one re-draft league I'm in, we draw our draft positions in the summer. I can't imagine what the reaction would be if I offered someone money to switch places with me. I'd expect to be kicked out of that league and a heart-to-heart talk with the commish of another league basically asking WTH was I thinking and put on notice for that league as well. We're a group of local friends who play in several leagues together and I'd feel like I embarrassed myself TBH.

 

[32 Counter Pass]

I always find these threads where a question is asked, then the original poster argues with every response that doesn't fit their position.

Why even bother with this exercise?

In sum, there is clearly a group of people that think--right or wrong-- this either is collusion or rubs up against it. End of thread/

 

[ghostguy123]

Cringes about an owner having more than one team in the same league aside...

Can't do that

 

[ghostguy123]

Scenario 1. You enter a startup draft with a $500 buy in, and someone draws the #1 slot, and you draw the #10. They offer to swap draft slots with you (every pick except future picks) if you pay them 200 bucks.
Now, whether or not you would do it isn't the question. The question is, should this be allowed? I say absolutely yes, and can't see one single reason why it shouldn't be allowed. There is no competitive balance issue whatsoever.

Scenario 2. You are in an existing league. $500 buy in. You have an awesome team. Some other guys team sucks. He offers you $1000 to switch teams with him. Every player, every pick.....basically the only thing that changes is the owners swap spots. The question isn't whether or not you would do it. The question is, should it be allowed? I say absolutely yes, as no competitive balance issues are evident.
Someone said this is like trading players for money. No, it is VERY not like that. Trading players for money would be an obvious competitive balance issue. Swapping teams is not as the teams remain exactly the same as they were, just with new owners.

.....I never said do any secret backdoor deals. I said if this was presented in your league, yay or nay? There doesn't need to be any rules for or against it. If everyone is cool with it, cool it happens. If not, cool, it doesn't happen.

Most money leagues in fantasy don't use some type of service to hold the "league pot" Most of them work on the honor system with their Commissioner or whomever is designated to hold the money and handle the logistics of distribution of payouts at the end of the season.

If you are the Commissioner in your league in question, or the person in charge of distribution, many owners are going to silently wonder if you will eventually steal their money.

Money being stolen and fraud in expected payouts happens all the time in fantasy football. It likely happens far more than most people think. Most of us who have played long enough have experienced it firsthand at some point and in some version.

I'm not saying you are definitely the kind of person to steal money from a league. But even by asking the question to your league for their viewpoint on the issue will raise silent questions in private if you can be trusted or not with holding their money. No Trust = No Incentive To Stay.

The point of fantasy for most people is have some lighthearted fun and competition. You are dragging in real life drama, or potential drama or the kind of crap they will expect to get from their jobs or from their marriages.

This is when veteran fantasy owners see a Commish who keeps trying to game every angle and bend every little thing to the edge outside of good faith, that they decide it's time to find a new league. Because the trust is gone. The perception of trust is eroded to nothing.

You keep saying there are no rules against it. Well where are the rules for it? Most leagues will not enable changes that are voted upon until the next season. Most leagues will not take league fees, then vote on a change to be enacted that same season. Well, if there are leagues like that, I'd suggest no one play in those kind of leagues.

Whatever views you have for yourself on this is yours. But you are setting the conditions where good active engaged veteran fantasy owners will not want to play with you. If I was in your league and you suggested this, I wouldn't want to play with you. I'd say No to all your trade offers no matter the value involved. I wouldn't want to play with the other guy either. I'd look for the first exit possible and as soon as possible. If you want a better team, make better use of the league's internal 'currency system' and build a better damn team on your own sweat and toil.

Let's get real about this. Anyone who tries this is going to try to foist it onto a league for that current season after league fees have already been collected. Because it's taking in 200 or 1000 as real life cash in exchange for watching that league die. What is the value of 1.1 in a league that only has four owners left after the majority have exited because of this kind of situation being dragged into the fold in the next season?

No one who has played fantasy long enough can practically believe that the majority of good engaged active owners are going to tolerate this and stay in that league.

You keep saying nothing is wrong here. What you aren't discussing is how to structure something like this for the long haul in an actual league constitution. You aren't doing that because you already know doing it will effectively kill that league.

I'm not a commish and never will be (again)

 

[ghostguy123]

Just got told a story last night that made me think of Scenario 1 in this thread.

Good buddy of mine gets a trade offer in a 10 year long dynasty league of his. My buddy has Jamarr Chase, another owner has Jefferson and is a Bengals fan. Dude offers Jefferson for Chase straight up. My buddy rejects. They go back and forth, JJ owner adds a 5th on top but my buddy counters with JJ + 2.10. Guy declines, offers Richie James instead. Another decline. They chat. It's one of those situations where both guys agree the deal is 100% fair straight up, it's just that they both prefer the same side of it. JJ owner wants Chase but doesn't want to hurt his team (by paying more picks/players) in any way to get the deal done, and thinks that if he overpays it'll get vetoed or accusations of collusion will get thrown around.

Then the next day the JJ owner says "ok ok, Jefferson and a bottle of Weller, final offer". My buddy is the commish and called me to explain the story and ask if he should boot the guy from the league. The guy says it was a joke offer. But my buddy is seriously considering replacing him now.


That's all it takes to start to unravel the integrity of a league. One guy offering $ outside of the league kitty, whether it's secret $ or it's announced in the league chat. Once you introduce the possibility of someone using non-league buy-in money to maneuver within the league, you better have a long long list of iron-clad rules that ALL owners agree and swear to, or you put the whole league on that slippery slope everyone's been talking about for 6 pages.

Scenario #1 can't happen. Wouldn't fly in any league I am in, and I'd likely leave the league if I found out that it had happened.

Your scenario of the JJ for Chase deal would not be allowed.

Also, why do you think scenario 1 is any worse than scenario 2?

 

[ghostguy123]

And yes I want to play with that guy, and I hope he makes cash offers for my team every year.

If this is a league that allows two co-owners of the same single "franchise", then why not become co-owners?

You can do the work to build that team, make trades, draft, research, sit for waivers, etc, etc. and he can set the lineups and take the glory if the "franchise" wins a championship. If he chooses to pay you in real life cash in private to do it, then so be it.

You'd have a better chance of proposing for the potential of two "co-owners" for a single league "franchise" (if that's not possible right now) into an actual league constitution, than for what you are proposing in the entire OP.

Ive been a co owner before. I'm not doing that anymore.

 

[ghostguy123]

For the one re-draft league I'm in, we draw our draft positions in the summer. I can't imagine what the reaction would be if I offered someone money to switch places with me. I'd expect to be kicked out of that league and a heart-to-heart talk with the commish of another league basically asking WTH was I thinking and put on notice for that league as well. We're a group of local friends who play in several leagues together and I'd feel like I embarrassed myself TBH.

Your situation wouldn't work then. Not every league is comprised of people who know each other or have ever even met.

 

[ghostguy123]

I always find these threads where a question is asked, then the original poster argues with every response that doesn't fit their position.

Why even bother with this exercise?

In sum, there is clearly a group of people that think--right or wrong-- this either is collusion or rubs up against it. End of thread/

Nobody is forcing you to participate

 

[wlwiles]

Just got told a story last night that made me think of Scenario 1 in this thread.

Good buddy of mine gets a trade offer in a 10 year long dynasty league of his. My buddy has Jamarr Chase, another owner has Jefferson and is a Bengals fan. Dude offers Jefferson for Chase straight up. My buddy rejects. They go back and forth, JJ owner adds a 5th on top but my buddy counters with JJ + 2.10. Guy declines, offers Richie James instead. Another decline. They chat. It's one of those situations where both guys agree the deal is 100% fair straight up, it's just that they both prefer the same side of it. JJ owner wants Chase but doesn't want to hurt his team (by paying more picks/players) in any way to get the deal done, and thinks that if he overpays it'll get vetoed or accusations of collusion will get thrown around.

Then the next day the JJ owner says "ok ok, Jefferson and a bottle of Weller, final offer". My buddy is the commish and called me to explain the story and ask if he should boot the guy from the league. The guy says it was a joke offer. But my buddy is seriously considering replacing him now.


That's all it takes to start to unravel the integrity of a league. One guy offering $ outside of the league kitty, whether it's secret $ or it's announced in the league chat. Once you introduce the possibility of someone using non-league buy-in money to maneuver within the league, you better have a long long list of iron-clad rules that ALL owners agree and swear to, or you put the whole league on that slippery slope everyone's been talking about for 6 pages.

Scenario #1 can't happen. Wouldn't fly in any league I am in, and I'd likely leave the league if I found out that it had happened.

Your scenario of the JJ for Chase deal would not be allowed.

Also, why do you think scenario 1 is any worse than scenario 2?

I never mentioned Scenario 2 at all. Don't try to put words in my mouth.

I'll just cut to the chase of what you came here to hear since nobody else has said it yet. I think both of your scenarios are 100% perfectly reasonable, ethical, and fair to the entire league as well as to the fantasy football community as a whole, and both moves should absolutely be allowed to take place without hinderance or delay. Good luck crushing both situations

 

[ghostguy123]

It’s been an entertaining discussion though - the auctioning of roster spots for the entire league is probably your best route.
[/QUOTE]

The auctioning of draft slots is essentially what is happening. Every team could offer cash for a draft slot swap. In either scenario, SOMEONE is paying more for a high draft slots.
It's a more fair and more fun scenario though if it's the whole league. A few teams will be playing year one for free

 

[ghostguy123]

Just got told a story last night that made me think of Scenario 1 in this thread.

Good buddy of mine gets a trade offer in a 10 year long dynasty league of his. My buddy has Jamarr Chase, another owner has Jefferson and is a Bengals fan. Dude offers Jefferson for Chase straight up. My buddy rejects. They go back and forth, JJ owner adds a 5th on top but my buddy counters with JJ + 2.10. Guy declines, offers Richie James instead. Another decline. They chat. It's one of those situations where both guys agree the deal is 100% fair straight up, it's just that they both prefer the same side of it. JJ owner wants Chase but doesn't want to hurt his team (by paying more picks/players) in any way to get the deal done, and thinks that if he overpays it'll get vetoed or accusations of collusion will get thrown around.

Then the next day the JJ owner says "ok ok, Jefferson and a bottle of Weller, final offer". My buddy is the commish and called me to explain the story and ask if he should boot the guy from the league. The guy says it was a joke offer. But my buddy is seriously considering replacing him now.


That's all it takes to start to unravel the integrity of a league. One guy offering $ outside of the league kitty, whether it's secret $ or it's announced in the league chat. Once you introduce the possibility of someone using non-league buy-in money to maneuver within the league, you better have a long long list of iron-clad rules that ALL owners agree and swear to, or you put the whole league on that slippery slope everyone's been talking about for 6 pages.

Scenario #1 can't happen. Wouldn't fly in any league I am in, and I'd likely leave the league if I found out that it had happened.

Your scenario of the JJ for Chase deal would not be allowed.

Also, why do you think scenario 1 is any worse than scenario 2?

I never mentioned Scenario 2 at all. Don't try to put words in my mouth.

I'll just cut to the chase of what you came here to hear since nobody else has said it yet. I think both of your scenarios are 100% perfectly reasonable, ethical, and fair to the entire league as well as to the fantasy football community as a whole, and both moves should absolutely be allowed to take place without hinderance or delay. Good luck crushing both situations

Neither are unfair to the rest of the league. But again, if you don't want to allow it, then dont

 

[ghostguy123]

Selling of picks for money is not allowed. Has never been allowed, can never be allowed.
Neither scenario changes anything about either franchise. Buying a pick would.

But you’re literally selling all the picks for money by trading draft slots…for money.

If it’s not allowed, and has never been allowed and never will be allowed, then you already know the answer.

Perhaps there is a disconnect here on what happening.
Franchise 1 has picks A,B,C,D.
Franchise 2 has picks V,X,Y,Z

None of that changes in scenario 1. Both franchises remain exactly the same. There is no unfair disadvantage to anyone in the league. Assets do not even changes franchises.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Selling of picks for money is not allowed. Has never been allowed, can never be allowed.
Neither scenario changes anything about either franchise. Buying a pick would.

But you’re literally selling all the picks for money by trading draft slots…for money.

If it’s not allowed, and has never been allowed and never will be allowed, then you already know the answer.

Perhaps there is a disconnect here on what happening.
Franchise 1 has picks A,B,C,D.
Franchise 2 has picks V,X,Y,Z

None of that changes in scenario 1. Both franchises remain exactly the same. There is no unfair disadvantage to anyone in the league. Assets do not even changes franchises.

But clearly, there is an advantage to one set of picks over the other, because someone is paying for it.

Again, you yourself acknowledged that.

Obviously, something of value is being exchanged for cash consideration outside of league finances.

That’s it. That’s the whole ball of wax right there.
/end

 

[32 Counter Pass]

I always find these threads where a question is asked, then the original poster argues with every response that doesn't fit their position.

Why even bother with this exercise?

In sum, there is clearly a group of people that think--right or wrong-- this either is collusion or rubs up against it. End of thread/

Nobody is forcing you to participate

Oh I do not feel like I am being forced to do anything. Just pointing out the futility of continuing this discussion, and your efforts to persuade everyone to accept your POV. I see it all the time on this board. Never fails to amuse me.