fellow commish's - please chime in on trade (1 Viewer)

[showdere]

14-man PPR league Qb/2Rb/3Wr/Te/K/D.

Both owners involved have 4+ years of legacy.

Commish (that's me) approves all trades.

In 6yrs with these guys, I have never rejected a trade.

Team A: 0-4 record

ryan, sanchez

fargas, gore, grant, mclain, LT,

bruce, caldwell, l moore, wallace

boss

bironas

49ers, steelers

(earlier injuries to draftees include: hixon, l robinson, t williamson)

Team B: 2-2 record

brady, orton

benson, bradshaw, coffee, mendenhall

avant, colston, driver, mason, s smith (CAR)

heiden, olsen

hauschka

bills

B offered A: bradshaw for gore

A accepted.

This is not collusion. That and dumping are my unwritten tests.

What's your read: Is A acting in good faith?

Thanks.

 

[X42]

Looks like the 0-4 team A is probably tired of dealing with injuries from Gore and LT and wants an RB that will produce now. I say it's on the level.

 

[editor47]

terrible trade. no excuse for making that deal.

 

[schooner44]

terrible trade. no excuse for making that deal.

terrible trade not make it collusion. Bad deal yes but collusion no.

 

[SSOG]

This is redraft, right? Because in Dynasty, that trade is absolutely inexcusable... but in Redraft, I can see something vaguely resembling logic on team A's side. Basically, he's 0-4. He cannot afford more than 1-2 more losses for the rest of the season. With Gore out, it is incredibly likely that he will suffer several more losses until Gore returns. Therefore, team A could decide to throw up the fantasy football equivalent of a hail mary for one last hope of making the playoffs this season. Granted, I think that's still incredibly stupid, as he likely could have done *FAR* better for Gore (it's like deciding to throw a hail mary, but having your RB throw it out of the wildcat instead of letting your QB do it- sure, your reasoning behind the hail mary is solid, but damned if that's not the stupidest way to execute said attempt). Still, trading an injured stud for a healthy RB at less than market value because you cannot afford any more losses while waiting for said stud to return is a decent enough motivation for a lopsided trade.

Generally, the answer in this situation is to ask owner A what his logic was behind the trade. If he can't give you a good answer, veto it. If he says something like I said in my first paragraph, then kindly inform him that he's the biggest idiot on the planet and let the trade go through. You can't legislate against stupidity.

 

[Addai's Adidas]

Guy is trading Gore for a back who will get points THIS WEEK. It's on the up and up. Let it go.

 

[jobarules]

Last I checked the team is 0-4 and has several RBs on a bye & Bradshaw plays the Raiders. Looks like hes doing everything he can to get a win this week and salvage his season.

 

[FUBAR]

I agree - he's trying to salvage his season now and probably thinks he has a better chance if he can pull out a win this week and roll with Grant/LT later. Or maybe he actually thinks Bradshaw could start for him and help more throughout the year than Gore.

You've known these guys for 4 years, do you think team A understands the game? Do you think he's likely to just give up and dump his studs to other teams?

 

[Miro Z]

Redraft, it's just about ok, dynasty, niet.

 

[Moniker]

Last I checked the team is 0-4 and has several RBs on a bye & Bradshaw plays the Raiders. Looks like hes doing everything he can to get a win this week and salvage his season.

/agree fully. I've seen plenty of 0-3 teams throw in the towel. This guy is 0-4 and seemingly looking for any way to get a win this week.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

If there's ever a question, why not simply ask the owners making the trade? Have them explain their rationale for making it. Everyone should be able to make a good case for a trade they make, and if they can explain it to the Commish (he doesn't have to agree, just follow their line of thinking) no problem.

You can probably explain Bradshaw for Gore, especially if you think Coffee might steal some carries when he comes back. But others might be harder to explain. Why guess whether it's shady or not? Just ask and see if they can back it up.

 

[comfortably numb]

On a side note, this is the 1st year I have done redraft in a while.

What is the norm for trade deadlines?

I am worried that this kind of deal will get done in week 9, when a 1-8 team really has no business making a trade.

How do you guys handle this?

Sorry for the hijack

 

[Sack-Religious]

Even without the injuries, team A has just about the sorriest cadre of WR's I've seen in recent memory.

I can somewhat see the logic of team A looking to get Bradshaw. Brandon Jacobs has a tendency to get dinged up and it could be argued that Bradshaw has looked better running the ball. If team A believes Bradshaw is going to start getting the lions share of the carries on the Giants maybe that's why he makes the deal.

IMO, if I were him I'd be attempting to get Coffee and a servicable WR, but that's just me.

I don't think the deal is collusive, but it certainly isn't a very good one. IMO, if team A is doing what he thinks is best to improve his team, you've got to let it go through.

 

[eric rymer]

This is redraft, right? Because in Dynasty, that trade is absolutely inexcusable... but in Redraft, I can see something vaguely resembling logic on team A's side. Basically, he's 0-4. He cannot afford more than 1-2 more losses for the rest of the season. With Gore out, it is incredibly likely that he will suffer several more losses until Gore returns. Therefore, team A could decide to throw up the fantasy football equivalent of a hail mary for one last hope of making the playoffs this season. Granted, I think that's still incredibly stupid, as he likely could have done *FAR* better for Gore (it's like deciding to throw a hail mary, but having your RB throw it out of the wildcat instead of letting your QB do it- sure, your reasoning behind the hail mary is solid, but damned if that's not the stupidest way to execute said attempt). Still, trading an injured stud for a healthy RB at less than market value because you cannot afford any more losses while waiting for said stud to return is a decent enough motivation for a lopsided trade.Generally, the answer in this situation is to ask owner A what his logic was behind the trade. If he can't give you a good answer, veto it. If he says something like I said in my first paragraph, then kindly inform him that he's the biggest idiot on the planet and let the trade go through. You can't legislate against stupidity.

This^

 

[TitusIII]

It wouldn't shock me if Bradshaw outscores Gore the rest of the way...and projecting an injury for Jacobs isn't exactly rocket science. Let it ride, let the man roll the dice...

 

[My Hope Street Alias]

On a side note, this is the 1st year I have done redraft in a while.What is the norm for trade deadlines?I am worried that this kind of deal will get done in week 9, when a 1-8 team really has no business making a trade.How do you guys handle this?Sorry for the hijack

Probably the majority of posters on this board will tell you that the 1-8 team paid his $ and he can do what he wants as long as it's not collusion. I've yet to hear how collusion is definitively proven unless one or both of the partners admit it. I, on the other hand, would say that this a job for a strong, honest commissioner. A ridiculously lopsided trade involving a 1-8 team should be vetoed, in my opinion. This is not a popular opinion.

 

[JimOtto#2]

Have him tell the league that Gore is on the trading block and if nobody gives him a better offer he will trade for Bradshaw. Maybe somebody offers him a better RB in exchange? I try and get the trades in my league preannounced that way on our league message board. If someone else thinks it's lopsided they can make a better offer. Then if it goes down nobody can b*tch about it.

 

[Zoomanji]

Last I checked the team is 0-4 and has several RBs on a bye & Bradshaw plays the Raiders. Looks like hes doing everything he can to get a win this week and salvage his season.

I agree - he's trying to salvage his season now and probably thinks he has a better chance if he can pull out a win this week and roll with Grant/LT later. Or maybe he actually thinks Bradshaw could start for him and help more throughout the year than Gore.You've known these guys for 4 years, do you think team A understands the game? Do you think he's likely to just give up and dump his studs to other teams?

Last I checked the team is 0-4 and has several RBs on a bye & Bradshaw plays the Raiders. Looks like hes doing everything he can to get a win this week and salvage his season.

/agree fully. I've seen plenty of 0-3 teams throw in the towel. This guy is 0-4 and seemingly looking for any way to get a win this week.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

14-man PPR league Qb/2Rb/3Wr/Te/K/D. Both owners involved have 4+ years of legacy.Commish (that's me) approves all trades. In 6yrs with these guys, I have never rejected a trade.Team A: 0-4 recordryan, sanchezfargas, gore, grant, mclain, LT, bruce, caldwell, l moore, wallacebossbironas49ers, steelers(earlier injuries to draftees include: hixon, l robinson, t williamson)Team B: 2-2 recordbrady, ortonbenson, bradshaw, coffee, mendenhallavant, colston, driver, mason, s smith (CAR)heiden, olsenhauschkabillsB offered A: bradshaw for goreA accepted.This is not collusion. That and dumping are my unwritten tests.What's your read: Is A acting in good faith?Thanks.

impossible to guage without knowing if redraftt or keeper.Certainly a panic move, but 0-4 might be the time to panic.

 

[Instinctive]

On a side note, this is the 1st year I have done redraft in a while.What is the norm for trade deadlines?I am worried that this kind of deal will get done in week 9, when a 1-8 team really has no business making a trade.How do you guys handle this?Sorry for the hijack

Probably the majority of posters on this board will tell you that the 1-8 team paid his $ and he can do what he wants as long as it's not collusion. I've yet to hear how collusion is definitively proven unless one or both of the partners admit it. I, on the other hand, would say that this a job for a strong, honest commissioner. A ridiculously lopsided trade involving a 1-8 team should be vetoed, in my opinion. This is not a popular opinion.

If the team is mathematically eliminated, no trade.Unless you have a bracket for non playoff teams and that is how you decide who gets what picks next season.Basically, no trade deadline but unless it will have an effect on next year, you can't trade once mathematically eliminated from contention.

 

[sinatravolta]

14-man PPR league Qb/2Rb/3Wr/Te/K/D. Both owners involved have 4+ years of legacy.Commish (that's me) approves all trades. In 6yrs with these guys, I have never rejected a trade.Team A: 0-4 recordryan, sanchezfargas, gore, grant, mclain, LT, bruce, caldwell, l moore, wallacebossbironas49ers, steelers(earlier injuries to draftees include: hixon, l robinson, t williamson)Team B: 2-2 recordbrady, ortonbenson, bradshaw, coffee, mendenhallavant, colston, driver, mason, s smith (CAR)heiden, olsenhauschkabillsB offered A: bradshaw for goreA accepted.This is not collusion. That and dumping are my unwritten tests.What's your read: Is A acting in good faith?Thanks.

I realize it's a 14-team draft - but how exactly did Team A wind up with those WRs (even with those injuries). First 3 rounds look like he made out great - Tomlinson/Gore/Grant (except you can only start 2). But what happened after that? Ryan in the 4th round? Steelers in the 5th? Or has he made other trades to wind up in this position? PPR and his best WR going into the season was Lance Moore?

 

[showdere]

Thanks for the valuable feedback.

I should have clarified:

This league is a Redraft.

We have been 12-man forever, but this year we tried 14-man plus PPR.

 

[Resident A]

Looks fine to me, considering the circumstances. Gore won't play until week 8 at the earliest, and who knows if he'll be himself again this season. He has 2 other RBs on byes & at 0-4 needs an RB Now.

 

[showdere]

You've known these guys for 4 years, do you think team A understands the game? Do you think he's likely to just give up and dump his studs to other teams?

Yes. No. But still -- it looked odd enough to seek an opinion here.

If there's ever a question, why not simply ask the owners making the trade? Have them explain their rationale for making it. Everyone should be able to make a good case for a trade they make, and if they can explain it to the Commish (he doesn't have to agree, just follow their line of thinking) no problem. You can probably explain Bradshaw for Gore, especially if you think Coffee might steal some carries when he comes back. But others might be harder to explain. Why guess whether it's shady or not? Just ask and see if they can back it up.

I did ask him this morning, and decided he's on the level. At the time of my posting, timezone differential prevented me from calling him.

On a side note, this is the 1st year I have done redraft in a while.What is the norm for trade deadlines?

We use a date between Week 10 and 11.

I realize it's a 14-team draft - but how exactly did Team A wind up with those WRs (even with those injuries). First 3 rounds look like he made out great - Tomlinson/Gore/Grant (except you can only start 2). But what happened after that? Ryan in the 4th round? Steelers in the 5th? Or has he made other trades to wind up in this position? PPR and his best WR going into the season was Lance Moore?

He drafted 14th in a 3rd Round Reversal Draft. His picks began with LT, gore, grant, ryan, hixon, moore, steelers. Perhaps he was looking to horde/trade -- who knows. He was soon beset by so many injuries it became moot.

 

[belljr]

As others have mentioned. Gore out for a while LT and Grant both on BYES this week.

So Fargas and Mcclain would be his starters.

It looks like a desperation move and I applaud it

 

[jobarules]

:bump:

 

[JMJ]

This is why commish's and nobody else should get involved in managing other people's teams or policing their moves/trades. Obvious collusion ... Yes (but this certainly was not). Any other circumstance just stay the hell out. If you want to play in a 14 man league ... don't try and run 14 teams. Just because you don't value a certain player a certain way doesn't mean that someone else can't value them much higher than you do ... and it doesn't mean that THEY can't be right!

 

[gianmarco]

Of note, Bradshaw is 5th in the entire NFL in rushing yards. And Jacobs hasn't missed time (yet).

Gore is 22nd despite rushing for over 200 yds in a game already.

I'm just saying.......

 

[digdug]

This is why commish's and nobody else should get involved in managing other people's teams or policing their moves/trades. Obvious collusion ... Yes (but this certainly was not). Any other circumstance just stay the hell out. If you want to play in a 14 man league ... don't try and run 14 teams. Just because you don't value a certain player a certain way doesn't mean that someone else can't value them much higher than you do ... and it doesn't mean that THEY can't be right!

i agree. there was nothing wrong with that trade, i dont think it was even questionable. actually team A (desperately needing a win) would have been stupid for declining. if you had taken the time to look at week 5 projections, team A significantly improved his RB situation.

 

[Oh the Humanity]

You don't know how healthy Gore will be when he gets back, and Bradshaw has been getting his yards despite a healthy Jacobs, and in fact he's out performing Jacobs so far and might end up as the starter. This is a good trade for the 2-2 guy only because he's got Coffee. This trade has all the dynamics of a really interesting trade with a lot of unknowns both good and bad for both sides. It's precisely these imponderables which make football and especially fantasy, interesting

 

[JMJ]

Just in case everyone does not realize this, this thread was started BEFORE this past weekend's game (ie: before Bradshaw went off again). My feelings are a few posts up, but just wanted to be sure people commenting now realized this.