I need help with Collusion (1 Viewer)

[DropKick]

None taken - this is all a thought exercise & I hope no one is taking it so seriously that they’d get offended by words on a screen from a stranger on the Internet. 

It has nothing to do with what I want or don’t want to see. 

If he said no twice then accepted money that’s all we need to know. You are selectively interpreting meaning from that hypothetical. Maybe he said no 5 times or 100 or 500 or accepted on the 1st offer. 

It is irrelevant to whether this is collusion. 

You assert it eatablishes collusion based on your creative interpretation that accepting $ proves that Team needed it to be incentivized. 

I’ve floated hundreds of trades over the years. I always start low and work up. And I’ve received offers from people who offer too much.

If I click accept and take back more value than I gave up, am I “colluding” because I didn’t value my own player as much as my trade partner did? 

Again, maybe he said no twice because he wanted to see if the pot would get sweetened. People counter my subpar initial offers all the time.

And then BAM! Dude offers $80

Note: at this point they’re both a-holes for breaking this very specific league rule. 

But they made an otherwise legal league trade, right? OP said draft pick trades are allowed.

and the league clearly allowed it because they all then drafted, managed and competed with these teams. 

No, the scenario where they’re not colluding with each other makes it not collusion. 

The part where he offers him $80 is an ##### move since it’s against the rules. And  the part where dude accepted the $80 is an ##### move because it’s against the rules. 

But it sounds like both teams did the deal to improve their own position, to mutual advantage, not to conspire to help only one side of the deal. 

This is a terrible analogy. And it’s (yet another) strawman fallacy.  

The prostitute is working in a profession of accepting $ for sexual favor. Which is against the law. 

if she’s in court, she was obviously caught soliciting prostitution - a crime. 

At which point it’s irrelevant what she was thinking. 

A better analogy here is that the prostitute was offered $200 for sex, and accepted knowing that her usual rate is only $100. But she accepted it because the john valued her coochie at $200 and offered too much to start with.

thanks for proving my point. 

This post is the definition of disingenuous.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

This post is the definition of disingenuous.

How so? 

I just took the time to thoughtfully respond with a well reasoned point.

Please do explain how this is “disingenuous”. 

 

[-OZ-]

Have we decided that it's just better to use auction yet?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Have we decided that it's just better to use auction yet?

 

or maybe just play FFB with people who won’t pull shady ish like this? 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

It strikes me that perhaps some in here are confusing “colluding” with “conspiring”.

these two alleged league members (I still think OP is winning a bet over this topic & how many pages it will get to) absolutely conspired to improve their respective positions. 

They conspired to break the league rule and involve cash in a trade. 

That’s a fact!  And if I were in that league I’d be mad as hell about it. 

but they don’t seem to have colluded in any way to help Team “pay a guy $80” win the championship. 

Just as whatever happened to the player selected at 1.01 is irrelevant (a point I agree with) whoever subsequently won the league is also irrelevant.  

That team 1.01 happened to emerge victorious is coincidental, not causal. And to our knowledge, not aided by the draft day trade. 

All collusion requires conspiracy. All conspiracies are not collusion. 

Fun topic. Hopefully people stay light hearted. It’s just ethics after all.  

 

[Loipz]

This thread was started by the mouths of salty league members looking for a reason not to pay the league champ. Trading a draft pick for $$ doesn’t guarantee a championship. Season long moves do. They’re only saying something after the ship cause they won nothing. 

 

[DropKick]

How so? 

I just took the time to thoughtfully resound with a well reasoned point.

Please do explain how this is “disingenuous”. 

Hard to believe you're being sincere with those conclusions and sarcasm.

One such conclusion is that the deal is OK, because "trading draft picks is allowed". You wouldn't come to that conclusion if the first pick in the draft were traded for the very last pick, right?  Then collusion would be clear.  This was just on the subtler end of the spectrum.

Like I said, it's an academic debate to me.  My issue is that "collusion" is often too narrowly defined.  No more, no less.

Your own words were "not to conspire to help only one side of the deal".   My definition is teams acting to deceive or defraud the league or to circumvent rules.  It doesn't have to benefit "one side of the deal".  In your words, "the only type of collusion in the context of fantasy football".

Two teams in week 8 are matched head to head but both kickers are on bye.  The teams agree to play short handed so neither side has an advantage.  This allows one team to keep his top kicker and the other to retain a high waiver priority.   This is collusion.  One team didn't help the other.  They both had their own self interest.  No competitive advantage (that week).  But they conspired to act in a way that had an impact on the other teams.  In this example, if both teams independently decide to play without a kicker then no problem.  It becomes collusion when they agree to behave that way,

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Hard to believe you're being sincere with those conclusions and sarcasm.

I use sarcasm at times because I’m sarcastic. Hi, I’m Hot Sauce Guy. Have you never seen me post on these forums?  

One such conclusion is that the deal is OK, because "trading draft picks is allowed". You wouldn't come to that conclusion if the first pick in the draft were traded for the very last pick, right?  Then collusion would be clear.  This was just on the subtler end of the spectrum.

Those are apples and orange. Of course I would not come to that conclusion because no rational person would.  

but trading a 1.01 for a 1.03 because one guy wanted 1.03 + $80 and another wanted 1.01 is far far closer in value (even without the $80) and doesn’t make it a subtle form of the scenario you suggest. 

Come on. 

Like I said, it's an academic debate to me.  My issue is that "collusion" is often too narrowly defined.  No more, no less.

Fair enough. You feel collusion is a broader scenario that also involves any form of cheating.

i disagree. 

Your own words were "not to conspire to help only one side of the deal".   My definition is teams acting to deceive or defraud the league or to circumvent rules.  It doesn't have to benefit "one side of the deal".  In your words, "the only type of collusion in the context of fantasy football".

Two teams in week 8 are matched head to head but both kickers are on bye.  The teams agree to play short handed so neither side has an advantage.  This allows one team to keep his top kicker and the other to retain a high waiver priority.   This is collusion.  One team didn't help the other.  They both had their each self interest.  No competitive advantage (that week).  But they conspired to act in a way that had an impact on the other teams.  In this example, if both teams independently decide to play without a kicker then no problem.  It becomes collusion when they agree to behave that way,

In your scenario they engaged in “roster fixing” - they conspired to do so.

it’s not collusion. As you said, it’s mutually beneficial.

it’s unethical and deserving of a league banishment, because they’re indeed conspiring with each other to break league rules by fielding an incomplete roster. 

If you want to define that as collusion, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I define it as two teams engaged in an unethical move to fix rosters to mutual benefit. 

 

[Arodin]

Have we decided that it's just better to use auction yet?

No but we've all agreed that PPR is the tool of the devil and must be banned!

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

No but we've all agreed that PPR is the tool of the devil and must be banned!

Blasphemer! 

 

[pinequick]

For all of you who think that this is "Collusion."

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

For all of you who think that this is "Collusion."

I’ve almost posted that quote in here several times but didn’t want to seem too sarcastic. 

 

 

[DropKick]

I use sarcasm at times because I’m sarcastic. Hi, I’m Hot Sauce Guy. Have you never seen me post on these forums?  

Those are apples and orange. Of course I would not come to that conclusion because no rational person would.  

but trading a 1.01 for a 1.03 because one guy wanted 1.03 + $80 and another wanted 1.01 is far far closer in value (even without the $80) and doesn’t make it a subtle form of the scenario you suggest. 

Come on. 

Fair enough. You feel collusion is a broader scenario that also involves any form of cheating.

i disagree. 

In your scenario they engaged in “roster fixing” - they conspired to do so.

it’s not collusion. As you said, it’s mutually beneficial.

it’s unethical and deserving of a league banishment, because they’re indeed conspiring with each other to break league rules by fielding an incomplete roster. 

If you want to define that as collusion, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I define it as two teams engaged in an unethical move to fix rosters to mutual benefit. 

Weird how a similarly structured deal, which is much closer in value, is not a subtler form of the extreme case.

Two teams engaged in an unethical move to fix rosters to mutual benefit at the expense of the rest of the league is textbook "C" word.

I'm out.  This thread wouldn't get this much play "in season" and the OP owes us some details.

 

[pinequick]

Weird how a similarly structured deal, which is much closer in value, is not a subtler form of the extreme case.

Two teams engaged in an unethical move to fix rosters to mutual benefit at the expense of the rest of the league is textbook "C" word.

I'm out.  This thread wouldn't get this much play "in season" and the OP owes us some details.

Seriously.  WTH?  "I need help with collusion..."

In my mind's eye so far all I get is that they swapped all of their draft picks in a redraft, and the guy going from #3 to #1 in the odd rounds paid $80 to do so.  If they have a rule against doing that, then they broke the rule.  But breaking that rule is not collusion.  Hence...

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Weird how a similarly structured deal, which is much closer in value, is not a subtler form of the extreme case.

Two teams engaged in an unethical move to fix rosters to mutual benefit at the expense of the rest of the league is textbook "C" word.

But in the OP, they didn’t do that. That’s your projection.

In the OP, the two teams swapped draft positions, and one got $80. 

You don’t know that the team that got the $80 was trying to help the team that gave him $80, and vice versa.

as I’ve pointrd out, they believed to be helping themselves improve.

collusion, in my opinion, requires that they knowingly believe that they are helping each other improve. 

How are you not getting that? 

I'm out.  This thread wouldn't get this much play "in season" and the OP owes us some details.

lol - on that I agree. 

 

[Gally]

If this is collusion it must mean that draft pick slot 1.01 provides an advantage to draft pick slot 1.03.  If this is the case then snake drafts should be banned as the team with 1.01 receives an unfair advantage over every team so everyone starts at a disadvantage.

That is not the case.  These two teams broke a league rule (cannot use cash in deals) however this was not collusion because the trade (minus the money) stands on its own and does not provide any team with an unfair advantage over the rest of the league.

As Teddy KGB says.....pay the man his money.   The payouts should not be withheld.

 

[ghostguy123]

It is nothing like that. Not even a little.

Correct

 

[ghostguy123]

Dumb

 

[Deamon]

This thing sure has blown up, with so many assumptions that the OP could so easily clear up if he didn't run and hide when things didn't go his way.  That alone makes me feel like maybe there's some info here he's not disclosing.  Dammit @Sdchargersfan1322 get back in here. 

To me, collusion is 2 teams 'working together' in a manner that hurts the competitiveness of the league, or hurts the odds of other teams winning.  It's more of a "teaming up" or stacking one team type thing.  This doesn't seem to remotely be the case here.  It had ZERO impact on how well other teams fared during the season, or the playoffs.  The only way this would bother me would be if Player A that moved up to 1.01 was known to be a better fantasy player and it would suck if he got the better player at 1.01, but that isn't remotely grounds to call them out for "cheating" or "colluding"

If anything, in hindsight, pick 3 was better this year (assuming that the guy took zeke?) than pick 1, so really this trade hurt the guy that moved up and he won based on great play this season. Which should be rewarded.

 

[ghostguy123]

Silly example question.  If me an another owner want to swap teams in week 9 and I pay him 80 bucks to do so, is it collusion?

I simply take control of his team, and he takes control of mine.

Stupid and weird sure.  Collusion no.

 

[habsfan]

I'm interested in this primarily because it isn't an explicit violation of any of my current "bylaws" or rules. We speak to collusion and we have a "sportsmanship" rule in place since it's impractical to have a written rule for very single event or situation that will ever occur. In my view, two people have gone "off book" and opinions on this specific bit of creativity range from "harmless" to "shady AF" (just an informal opinion poll by yours truly).

I wouldn't hold up payouts in this case because in a practical sense, "fair play" in a redraft league effectively begins with the draft and not with anything leading up to it (like the selection of draft slots). I probably wouldn't un-invite any of the current people in my league for this either. I would treat it as "creativity" and explain to each of them why we can't have this sort of creativity happen again. 

I am still undecided / unconvinced on collusion versus "conduct detrimental". I don't believe the dictionary definition of collusion maps neatly and conveniently to fantasy football and I think that's why these conversations get interesting. Real "case studies" like this challenge our respective understandings/working definitions of collusion is and I think that's good. Sometimes as arguments ensue from various people, I start to think of that Internet meme "I don't think X means what you think it means..."

I don't see collusion as an agreement between two parties where one defers benefit to the other as (I think) Hot Sauce Guy does. Oligarchies (business) / price fixing are examples of collusion where an agreement yields (or attempts to yield) mutual benefit, sometimes to multiple parties. The parties involved compete with one another but they do so within the terms of their collusion, which gives them an advantage over another set of parties (most of which would say is unfair). In business collusion can be legal or illegal and I compare this to drafting/teams in the Tour de France. Only one person wins the race but there's lots of teamwork employed in the strategy to win - and it's legal. Jump back to FF and "teamwork" (or anything like it) is absolutely not legal.

The introduction of outside compensation here is troubling but as a "thought exercise", I keep coming back to the fact that the ten other owners who were not part of this arrangement were "cheated out of" an opportunity to negotiate their draft position. When you draw a number out of a hat, there is an (often unwritten) rule that this is your draft slot. Ten owners abided by that "rule" and two did not. I won't argue that once the draft started they were put at any sort of measurable competitive disadvantage but the fact is (academically speaking), the draft selection process was not a level playing field for all twelve teams.

 

[ghostguy123]

Habsfan, why should the creativity not be allowed in the future??  Embrace it.  Hell, encourage it.  Let everyone know they are allowed to try and buy their draft slots after the random order is drawn.  

Quit being mizers you mizers.  Try and have fun once in a while.

 

[habsfan]

Habsfan, why should the creativity not be allowed in the future??  Embrace it.  Hell, encourage it.  Let everyone know they are allowed to try and buy their draft slots after the random order is drawn.  

Quit being mizers you mizers.  Try and have fun once in a while.

If you want to do it up right, auction all the spots and give the money to charity. 

 

[DropKick]

But in the OP, they didn’t do that. That’s your projection.

In the OP, the two teams swapped draft positions, and one got $80. 

You don’t know that the team that got the $80 was trying to help the team that gave him $80, and vice versa.

as I’ve pointrd out, they believed to be helping themselves improve.

collusion, in my opinion, requires that they knowingly believe that they are helping each other improve. 

How are you not getting that? 



lol - on that I agree. 

The team that took the cash didn't "improve". They accepted a slightly less valuable draft slot. That is the difference in our opinions - the disparity in traded assets.  I just have a zero tolerance perspective.  Someone took money to make a trade that may not otherwise make...

Looking forward to the draft.  I've got a man crush on one guy.  Would you consider trading me the 1.1 for the 20.12?

-  Are you out of your mind?  Why would I do that?

Yeah, sorry, I always start with a low ball bid.  What if we swapped all our draft picks?  I pick first and you pick 3rd.  You will get two top 22 players this way.  It's a serpentine draft, the numbers will work themselves out in the end.

-  Maybe I have my eye on one guy too.  If a give up the 1.01 for the 1.03, would you add another high pick to make it worth my while?  Let's say the 3.03 for the 5.01?

That's a little steep!

-  You want the first pick?

(pause) How about if just pay you to swap?

-  Pay me?  How much is it worth?

$80?

-  Deal (translation: I'm willing to take an admittedly small small step down in draft position for cash.  The reward is worth the risk)

ETA: The essence of a good trade is complementary needs which helps each other improve.

 

[ghostguy123]

ETA: The essence of a good trade is complementary needs which helps each other improve.

 

[ghostguy123]

If you want to do it up right, auction all the spots and give the money to charity. 

Umm, nah.  Add it to the pot.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

The team that took the cash didn't "improve". They accepted a slightly less valuable draft slot. That is the difference in our opinions - the disparity in traded assets.  I just have a zero tolerance perspective.  Someone took money to make a trade that may not otherwise make...

Nope. You are projecting that the draft spot is “slightly less valuable”.

That is not a fact, it’s your opinion & it’s pure projection to suit your argument.

Draft spots are draft spots and their “value” is not intrinsic. Some people would rather draft at 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, or 12.  Running a KTS-Style draft for 5-6 years now I’m always shocked when someone would rather have the 12th pick than the 3rd or 4th (happens every couple years) but that’s because of how *I* value the 3rd pick, which doesn’t make the 3rd pick more valuable; and conversely the person opting for the 1.12 doesn’t make 1.03 less valuable, because that’s only how *he* values the positions. 

But the fact is that we do not know how the team that traded down valued that 1.03 draft position. I’ve said it 5 times and it’s true every time: if team “get $80 from a sucker” wanted any of DJ, Bell or AB, then they valued pick 1.03 equally. Maybe even more, as they get the player they want *and* pick earlier in the 2nd.

but we do not know that. And since we don’t know, we cannot assume either way. I’m not saying my alternate possibility is the truth - merely that it’s an alternate possibility. 

All we know for certain from the information we have is that that person valued $80 more than the difference in draft position. And that still doesn’t make it collusion. 

And since this projection of valuation is the heart of your position that this is collusion it’s a “misleading premise” fallacy. It fails the logic test. 

Looking forward to the draft.  I've got a man crush on one guy.  Would you consider trading me the 1.1 for the 20.12?

-  Are you out of your mind?  Why would I do that?

Yeah, sorry, I always start with a low ball bid.  What if we swapped all our draft picks?  I pick first and you pick 3rd.  You will get two top 22 players this way.  It's a serpentine draft, the numbers will work themselves out in the end.

-  Maybe I have my eye on one guy too.  If a give up the 1.01 for the 1.03, would you add another high pick to make it worth my while?  Let's say the 3.03 for the 5.01?

That's a little steep!

-  You want the first pick?

(pause) How about if just pay you to swap?

-  Pay me?  How much is it worth?

$80?

-  Deal (translation: I'm willing to take an admittedly small small step down in draft position for cash.  The reward is worth the risk)

This example is literally one gigantic  misleading premise fallacy    

You do not know that any of this conversation went down.

Your “translation” is merely a summary of your projection that one pick is worth more than the other.

The only thing you know is that one team traded the 1.01 for the 1.03 & vice versa. And the team getting the 1.03 also got $80. It’s all any of us know. 

Filling in the blanks with mental gymnastics in order to substantiate your claim of pick valuation only serves to highlight the “misleading premise”  fallacy to a ridiculous extreme.

ETA: The essence of a good trade is complementary needs which helps each other improve.

This is comedy gold. Do the trade partners put flowers in their hair, hold hands and sing kumbaya to celebrate their most fair and mutually beneficial  union afterwards?  

That is not the “essence of a good trade”. What utter nonsense. 

The classic “definition of a good deal” is one where both parties walk away believing they got the better of each other.

the goal of deal making is to win the deal. The ideal is to improve your team while weakening your trade partner’s team.

Irony: what you describe as “the essence of a good trade” is what most folks see as collusion. 

“Hey, let’s help each other get better so we can beat all these other teams!”

 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Habsfan, why should the creativity not be allowed in the future??  Embrace it.  Hell, encourage it.  Let everyone know they are allowed to try and buy their draft slots after the random order is drawn.  

Quit being mizers you mizers.  Try and have fun once in a while.

Maybe not that but a “draft position auction” rather than drawing names could actually work. 

100% of money bid goes into the kitty and does not count as league fee. Just extra $ for everyone to win. 

I’d be the guy getting my draft spot for free, likely picking 8th or 9th. Which is where I seem to pick every damn year anyway.  

Note: I wouldn’t want to play in such a league; but it’s a good way to build a pot and get bragging rights over someone who paid $100 extra to be in the same league if you win. 

 

[ghostguy123]

Note: I wouldn’t want to play in such a league

Why??  Bigger pot with less money invested on your part and everything is the same once the draft order is set.

 

[ghostguy123]

Auction for draft slots actually seems like a phenominal idea that i will try to push through if I ever do another redraft.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Why??  Bigger pot with less money invested on your part and everything is the same once the draft order is set.

Oh, I love that part. 

But my league has many people from different demographics and life/family situations. 

Much like the valuation point I made above, not everyone values picks equally. So while I’d be ok not bidding at all for a position, someone else might feel disadvantaged if they wanted a top 4 pick but had a mother in the hospital or a kid who needs braces or a new bike & they can’t bid.

i am a big fan of randomly drawn draft positions where everyone has equal shot at every draft spot to start. KTS helps too, as if the guy at 5 wants the 4 spot and the 4-spot guy picks the 12 instead then 5-guy got an extra shot at it.  

but the draft position auction would build a fat kitty for sure. 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Auction for draft slots actually seems like a phenominal idea that i will try to push through if I ever do another redraft.

I have good ideas sometimes.  

maybe a $100 or $200 cap? 

I suppose if 3-4 people all want the 1.01 and all max bid, you could just throw only those 4 names into the hat & draw 1. 

And you could do it like a player auction - draw names & draft pick positions are proposed by the league members. 

I would nominate 1.01 to get people spending. Because again: I wouldn’t pay a penny for my spot.  

 

[ghostguy123]

I have good ideas sometimes.  

maybe a $100 or $200 cap? 

I see no reason to put a cap on it.  If its a 100 dollar league and some idiot wants to spend 500 on the top pick let him

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I see no reason to put a cap on it.  If its a 100 dollar league and some idiot wants to spend 500 on the top pick let him

See my previous post about different league members/demographics/life circumstances.

“Team Single guy investment banker” can probably more easily afford to do that than “Team 3 kids wife just lost her job youngest daughter has pancreatic cancer”. 

Team investment banker gets 1.01 annually. That would get old in a hurry.

 

[Hu-Tang Clan]

So still no responses from the OP explaining anything further at all in these 5 pages?

 

[ghostguy123]

See my previous post about different league members/demographics/life circumstances.

“Team Single guy investment banker” can probably more easily afford to do that than “Team 3 kids wife just lost her job youngest daughter has pancreatic cancer”. 

Team investment banker gets 1.01 annually. That would get old in a hurry.

Not at all.  Not if he keeps adding to the pot.  No way.  Not like whoever gets pick 1 has a huge advantage anyway.  Not based on what i have experienced.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

So still no responses from the OP explaining anything further at all in these 5 pages?

Yeah - I’m pretty sure they’ve got a bet going on how many pages this will reach. Epic troll of the shark tank.  

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Not at all.  Not if he keeps adding to the pot.  No way.  Not like whoever gets pick 1 has a huge advantage anyway.  Not based on what i have experienced.

I agree - but not everyone does. Some teams want a shot at 1.01

 

[ghostguy123]

I agree - but not everyone does. Some teams want a shot at 1.01

Good lord fine.  Then say people cant have the #1 multiple years in a row.  Problem solved

 

[Deamon]

The classic “definition of a good deal” is one where both parties walk away believing they got the better of each other.

Not that this is really relevant, but I heard a quote once that actually I find to be much more true.  The definition of a good compromise is one where both parties feel like they've given up too much"

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Not that this is really relevant, but I heard a quote once that actually I find to be much more true.  The definition of a good compromise is one where both parties feel like they've given up too much"

 I’ve also heard this paraphrased more neutrally as “the definition of a good deal is one that both parties can live with”

All three of which are more accurate than the nonsense that I quoted above.  

 

[Deamon]

“Hey, let’s help each other get better so we can beat all these other teams!”

 

Helping EACH OTHER'S teams where both benefit is not collusion.  Helping one team benefit is (and it's usually done to stack a better team, thus hurting the league competition) collusion. 

How does it make it ANY harder for Teams C to L win if teams A and B swap draft spots?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Helping EACH OTHER'S teams where both benefit is not collusion.  Helping one team benefit is (and it's usually done to stack a better team, thus hurting the league competition) collusion. 

How does it make it ANY harder for Teams C to L win if teams A and B swap draft spots?

 Technically yes. It would be two people conspiring together against the rest of the league. 

 I was using phrasing that I thought the other person could better understand. 

 If you look throughout this topic you’ll see that I share your exact definition of what collusion is. 

 

[Deamon]

 Technically yes. It would be two people conspiring together against the rest of the league. 

 I was using phrasing that I thought the other person could better understand. 

 If you look throughout this topic you’ll see that I share your exact definition of what collusion is. 

Ya for sure.  My post was more agreeing and expanding than contradicting.