What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Injuries While Trades In "League Approval" window (1 Viewer)

If someone is injured after trade is accepted, but while in "Collusion Veto Vote Window",

  • Tough Luck to the recipient of the now-injured player...Trade Goes Through.

    Votes: 107 82.9%
  • Commish should reverse the trade because it's not 100% Final

    Votes: 7 5.4%
  • Up to the league to vote the trade down or not (risk of "self interest voting?")

    Votes: 10 7.8%
  • Other

    Votes: 5 3.9%

  • Total voters
    129

[icon]

Insoxicated
Situation:
Fairly Competitive Money League. 10 Teams. Coworkers.
Trade is Proposed/Accepted (V.Cruz for M.James).
There is a 2 day "league review vote" window (not my call)
James is now out for the year while the trade is in league-vote review window.

Player approached me as commish to veto trade now that his incoming guy is injured. I told him I don't feel right vetoing a trade due to an injury right after it's acceptance. He's complaining that the trade isn't actually complete yet.

I made a call but curious how fellow FBG commissioners would handle this. Vote above in how you'd handle this...

 

Koya

Footballguy
Really a no win here. By the letter of the law the trade should go through, but that's also a bs outcome. That said, by accepting a trade when a player must still play, you are also accepting a level of risk.

Whatever you choose there will e detractors, so at the least use this as a reason to eliminate any ( or at worst limit ) delay between acceptance and a trade going through.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

FF Wiseguy

Footballguy
Really a no win here. By the letter of the law the trade should go through, but that's also a bs outcome. That said, by accepting a trade when a player must still play, you are also accepting a level of risk.

Whatever you choose there will e detractors, so at the least use this as a reason to eliminate any ( or at worst limit ) delay between acceptance and a trade going through.
This. The Thursday night games can make the windows really small for some players, but if you want to avoid having a trade pending during the games, you can usually get that done pretty easily.

Agree with the rest that it's unlucky, but in no way should the trade be vetoed.

 

Disc Shark

Footballguy
"There is a 2 day "league review vote" window"

What is the purpose of the league review vote?

Is it to allow the league to vote down unfair, unbalanced or collusive trades? Do all teams in the league actually vote on each and every trade?

If so, I agree that the trade is not complete until the 2-day window passes. And at this point the trade is unbalanced, at the very least, as one team receives a valuable, productive player and the other team gets nothing (assuming redraft league; I suppose it could be different in dynasty).

How exactly does the league review vote procedure work?

I don't think there should be a commissioner veto, unless that is a part of the league review vote procedure.

 

FF Wiseguy

Footballguy
"There is a 2 day "league review vote" window"

What is the purpose of the league review vote?

Is it to allow the league to vote down unfair, unbalanced or collusive trades? Do all teams in the league actually vote on each and every trade?

If so, I agree that the trade is not complete until the 2-day window passes. And at this point the trade is unbalanced, at the very least, as one team receives a valuable, productive player and the other team gets nothing (assuming redraft league; I suppose it could be different in dynasty).

How exactly does the league review vote procedure work?

I don't think there should be a commissioner veto, unless that is a part of the league review vote procedure.
To me, the trade has to be judged based on the value at time of acceptance. I actually think it should be judged on value based on time of proposal, but I'm probably in the minority there.

The poll got it right in why LM veto usually works best. A lot of times, people give "self-interest" votes instead of judging the merits of the trade. So people often vote against trades benefitting those in higher standings, and I've even seen some people vote against a trade because they want to try and get the player being traded.

For LM votes, there's obviously the conflict of interest in an LM being the only person who can veto their own trade, but to me it's still the best system. If you don't trust your LM not to collude, then you probably shouldn't be in the league anyways.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

krsone21

Footballguy
I voted the trade should stand as is.

I'm assuming the "league review vote" period is for collusion purposes. If so this trade is definitely not collusion just bad timing for the guy that traded for Mike James.

The guy who traded for Victor Cruz should not get punished by having the trade reversed. He made a trade in good faith, its not like he was trying to trade damaged goods. Mike James was healthy at the time the trade was accepted.

 

10tihwj

Footballguy
I voted Other, as in "I would leave any league which had a 2 day trade waiting period. Trading around a game is stupid but how many guys get hurt during practice too? There's really no safe time...

 

fantasycurse42

Footballguy Jr.
Echoing most - Absolutely goes through! League review is nonsense to begin with - IMO once it has been accepted, it is a done deal, the only reason it can be overturned is if there is collusion, that is the only thing league review is for (which is garbage regardless).

 

10tihwj

Footballguy
For the record, if I was the guy getting Cruz in this deal, I would let the guy out of it. Maybe I'm too nice but stuff happens in leagues where there is a waiting period.

 

Chaka

Footballguy
NFL lets teams void trades if a player doesn't pass a team physical. This seems to be on par with that situation.

Beyond that it is a #### move by the guy getting Cruz to pursue completion of the trade and I think as commish you should at least try to figure out why that guy is being an ####### about it. I am quite certain that guy would be screaming bloody murder if he was on the bad end of this deal.

 

nastynate

Footballguy
If the trade was accepted, I think you stand on that. If the trade is/was pending and only accepted AFTER the injury occurred, I think that should be grounds for veto, but it doesn't sound like the case here.

As someone else mentioned, you're taking on a risk by trading for a player that has another game before he gets moved to your team. Up to the individual owner to control those risks -- last time I checked, players didnt have to pass physicals before getting added to fantasy teams (although you could probably make that a rule).

 

Reegus

Footballguy
The trade was accepted pre injury. It goes through, if I was getting Cruz no way in hell would I let him out of it.

 

Chaka

Footballguy
Bunch of people in here who would be singing a much different tune if they were the ones getting James.

It's B.S.

 

Flying Elvis

Footballguy
Trade was accepted in good faith. The league rules made a mess of it, but the guy who gets Cruz shouldn't be penalized by a stupid league rule. The trade should stand, assuming it was accepted prior to injury.

The only gray area here is what the definition +/- intent is on the waiting period for trades.

Get rid of waiting periods.

 

ebsteelers

Footballguy
i got a rodgers in a trade...and he got hurt the next game.. first 3 minutes in.. guess i should complain

its part of the game... the waiting period is silly though..

 
Last edited by a moderator:

glumpy

breeze
League rules do make a mess of this--and my answer depends on how I read the OP. The poll says the injury occurs before the trade is finalized (critical).

In the poll you define it as a "Collusion Veto Vote Window", but in your OP you call it a "2 day "league review vote" window"

If it is ONLY collusion for which a trade can be denied than it has to stand, but if there is any other basis or room for interpretation than it should be cancelled. Given that collusion is virtually impossible to prove it's pretty much a garbage rule in the first place. There would not be an issue here without that rule.

 

Chaka

Footballguy
So I guess the NFL should have the same policy and do away with physical exams after trades are agreed upon.

 

Amused to Death

Footballguy
So I guess the NFL should have the same policy and do away with physical exams after trades are agreed upon.
Its not the same thing though. Both players were healthy when the trade was agreed upon.

ETA: do away with the stupid review period and its a non-issue.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Amused to Death

Footballguy
What if James didn't get hurt, but instead ran for 175 and 4 TDs. Could the original owner change his mind and now want more than Cruz in the trade?

 

Sarnoff

Footballguy
Reverse the trade if both owners agree. If I traded away James and he got hurt, I'd be ok with reversing the deal if the other owner cried about it.

 

krsone21

Footballguy
NFL lets teams void trades if a player doesn't pass a team physical. This seems to be on par with that situation.

Beyond that it is a #### move by the guy getting Cruz to pursue completion of the trade and I think as commish you should at least try to figure out why that guy is being an ####### about it. I am quite certain that guy would be screaming bloody murder if he was on the bad end of this deal.
Except Mike James was healthy when the deal was made. It would be one thing if the player was injured already but he wasn't at the time the trade was excepted.

 

blake

Footballguy
For the record, if I was the guy getting Cruz in this deal, I would let the guy out of it. Maybe I'm too nice but stuff happens in leagues where there is a waiting period.
Thankfully I play in a league where it is simply a hobby and no one is making a career out of fantasy football. No way should the guy getting Cruz stick with him. The only decent thing is to send back Cruz. Of course, if you're not decent and you'd actually keep Cruz, then that is something different. It'd be a good lesson to learn if I was ever in a league with someone like that to get out immediately.

Edited to add: Personal preference only; I choose not to be in leagues where people take fantasy football a little too seriously.

Also edited to add: I'm not sure of the purpose of a two day league approval window. Can the league owners weigh in on other people's trades? If so, that's a rule that needs to be gotten rid of. Does it take 2 whole days for the commissioner to process a trade? If so, maybe the commish should hand over the duties to someone who can be more active with the league.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Zow

Footballguy
Trade should go through, but that sucks. I agree with the notion that the other owner probably could/should agree to trade being vacated (but he certainly doesn't have to).

 

rocketsauce

Footballguy
Trade is processed. League-vote on veto is ridiculous, and is collusion in and of itself. No collusion, no veto, no review necessary.

Also I hate these trade review windows. Trades should be immediate and in the instance of a collusion trade, be dealt with and reversed by the commissioner.

 

Amused to Death

Footballguy
For the record, if I was the guy getting Cruz in this deal, I would let the guy out of it. Maybe I'm too nice but stuff happens in leagues where there is a waiting period.
Thankfully I play in a league where it is simply a hobby and no one is making a career out of fantasy football. No way should the guy getting Cruz stick with him. The only decent thing is to send back Cruz. Of course, if you're not decent and you'd actually keep Cruz, then that is something different. It'd be a good lesson to learn if I was ever in a league with someone like that to get out immediately.

Edited to add: Personal preference only; I choose not to be in leagues where people take fantasy football a little too seriously.

Also edited to add: I'm not sure of the purpose of a two day league approval window. Can the league owners weigh in on other people's trades? If so, that's a rule that needs to be gotten rid of. Does it take 2 whole days for the commissioner to process a trade? If so, maybe the commish should hand over the duties to someone who can be more active with the league.
Trade should go through, but that sucks. I agree with the notion that the other owner probably could/should agree to trade being vacated (but he certainly doesn't have to).
I can certainly understand this point. For me it would depend on the league and the level of competition. But I'll ask both of you; if there was no review period and the players change rosters the instant the 'accept' button is hit, would you feel compelled to reverse the trade out of the goodness of your heart? Or is that a different situation?

 

ShockTheMonkey

Footballguy
The main thing for me to consider is the timing of the trade being accepted.

Offer trade>>Player is injured>>>Trade is quickly accepted

Offer trade>>Trade is accepted>>Player is quickly injured

If the league voted to veto it, I'd allow it. If it was up to me alone, I'd let it stand since it's no different than if the player you just received had injured himself in practice on Friday after the trade had gone through.

 

Chaka

Footballguy
I can certainly understand this point. For me it would depend on the league and the level of competition. But I'll ask both of you; if there was no review period and the players change rosters the instant the 'accept' button is hit, would you feel compelled to reverse the trade out of the goodness of your heart? Or is that a different situation?
Nope, I would not reverse the trade under that circumstance.

 

Ignoratio Elenchi

Footballguy
I have an opinion on how I'd rule if I was forced to as a commissioner, but I don't think you have to.

There's a process in your league for league members to review and vote on trades. So let them. If your leaguemates feel the trade should stand, it will. If they don't, it won't. :shrug:

 

meatwad1

Footballguy
Trades should be considered final only when approved by league members. Otherwise, why do you have it? If there is an approval window, that needs to be factored into what you are doing.

Owners should have an option of pulling out before it is approved or disapproved.

 

Adam Harstad

Moderator
NFL lets teams void trades if a player doesn't pass a team physical. This seems to be on par with that situation.

Beyond that it is a #### move by the guy getting Cruz to pursue completion of the trade and I think as commish you should at least try to figure out why that guy is being an ####### about it. I am quite certain that guy would be screaming bloody murder if he was on the bad end of this deal.
If the trade review period expired, the players switched teams, and James was injured literally 5 minutes afterwards, would you still be willing to undo that trade? How about a day afterwards? A week? Half a season? Where's the cutoff point?

For me, the cutoff point is simple- when the trade is accepted, the trade is final. By hitting accept, each owner is signaling his willingness to accept the other side and all risks that come along with it. Adding an approval period doesn't change this, whether it's two hours, two days, two weeks, or two years. The second I hit the accept button, I agreed to take on the other side of the deal and to forfeit all rights to my side of the deal.

Now, if I were the guy getting Cruz in this situation, I might agree to reverse the trade just to be a nice guy. It'd depend on the context and the league. In no way would I feel obligated to do so, and under absolutely no circumstances would I be an "#######" if I didn't do that.

 

ebsteelers

Footballguy
NFL lets teams void trades if a player doesn't pass a team physical. This seems to be on par with that situation.

Beyond that it is a #### move by the guy getting Cruz to pursue completion of the trade and I think as commish you should at least try to figure out why that guy is being an ####### about it. I am quite certain that guy would be screaming bloody murder if he was on the bad end of this deal.
If the trade review period expired, the players switched teams, and James was injured literally 5 minutes afterwards, would you still be willing to undo that trade? How about a day afterwards? A week? Half a season? Where's the cutoff point?

For me, the cutoff point is simple- when the trade is accepted, the trade is final. By hitting accept, each owner is signaling his willingness to accept the other side and all risks that come along with it. Adding an approval period doesn't change this, whether it's two hours, two days, two weeks, or two years. The second I hit the accept button, I agreed to take on the other side of the deal and to forfeit all rights to my side of the deal.

Now, if I were the guy getting Cruz in this situation, I might agree to reverse the trade just to be a nice guy. It'd depend on the context and the league. In no way would I feel obligated to do so, and under absolutely no circumstances would I be an "#######" if I didn't do that.
great post agree 100%..

like i said earlier i trade for rodgers right before he got hurt against the bears.. trade was accepted by both parties.. he got hurt 5 minutes into the game.. sucks for me, but i accepted the trade ... if your gonna play/live in a paranoid world where you think everyone is gonna get hurt then dont accept any trades and play with who you draft and pick up.

for all we know victor could get hurt this week.

i mean it is football, injuries do happen, and thats part of trading and accepting trades

 

blake

Footballguy
Trade should go through, but that sucks. I agree with the notion that the other owner probably could/should agree to trade being vacated (but he certainly doesn't have to).
I can certainly understand this point. For me it would depend on the league and the level of competition. But I'll ask both of you; if there was no review period and the players change rosters the instant the 'accept' button is hit, would you feel compelled to reverse the trade out of the goodness of your heart? Or is that a different situation?
Really fair question. And you are completely right about it depending on the league. I'm sure many leagues have no scruples and if some love those leagues, that is great for them. Not for me, but at the same time, I've never given much time or attention to a league that A) allows owners to weigh in on others' trades and B) it takes two whole days for a trade to process. This very situation shows why that is an eternity.

So, to answer your question - in the only league I care about, there would never be any review period unless it was a very questionable trade, and so if this trade was done then, and I got Cruz, I would feel compelled to send Cruz back to the original owner and take James back. Fantasy football isn't life or death for me and I care more about maintaining good relationships. Now, I'm talking if the trade was less than a week old and if this happened. I'm not sure what I'd do if a week passed and this happened. I think at that point, it'd probably be tough luck, unfortunately. And I think anyone in my league would understand that. Again though...my opinion is only that, and probably in the minority.

 

blake

Footballguy
for all we know victor could get hurt this week.
This is a great point.

This reminds me of the many posts in this forum from people complaining about a one-sided trade. Those one-sided trades often balance out or even swing to the side that people thought was hosed in the deal. Cruz could finish out the season horribly (kind of like Hakeem Nicks looks destined to do) or worse.

 

10tihwj

Footballguy
For the record, if I was the guy getting Cruz in this deal, I would let the guy out of it. Maybe I'm too nice but stuff happens in leagues where there is a waiting period.
Thankfully I play in a league where it is simply a hobby and no one is making a career out of fantasy football. No way should the guy getting Cruz stick with him. The only decent thing is to send back Cruz. Of course, if you're not decent and you'd actually keep Cruz, then that is something different. It'd be a good lesson to learn if I was ever in a league with someone like that to get out immediately.

Edited to add: Personal preference only; I choose not to be in leagues where people take fantasy football a little too seriously.

Also edited to add: I'm not sure of the purpose of a two day league approval window. Can the league owners weigh in on other people's trades? If so, that's a rule that needs to be gotten rid of. Does it take 2 whole days for the commissioner to process a trade? If so, maybe the commish should hand over the duties to someone who can be more active with the league.
Trade should go through, but that sucks. I agree with the notion that the other owner probably could/should agree to trade being vacated (but he certainly doesn't have to).
I can certainly understand this point. For me it would depend on the league and the level of competition. But I'll ask both of you; if there was no review period and the players change rosters the instant the 'accept' button is hit, would you feel compelled to reverse the trade out of the goodness of your heart? Or is that a different situation?
I'm in some leagues which are more competitive than others (none of which have a 2 day review period). Circumstance dictate what I do. Last year in an extensive keeper league (but not a dynasty league), I traded Jahvid Best for a draft pick when it seemed like he was about 50/50 to be cleared to play. Two days later, news came out that his career was over. I discussed it with the guy I traded with and I agreed, without much prompting, to rescind the trade. We both bargained for the exchange of an injured player believing he would come back at some point; the only question was when. When his career was over (or at least it was apparently he would not be cleared at any real point in the future), I felt it appropriate to rescind because our mutual assumption was false.

On this trade, there is no reason for the league to overturn it. The trade was fair when made and when it was accepted, nothing had changed. That said, I think it's reasonable that the two owners get together and work it out. I think the league should approve (if the two involved agree) to either rescind the trade or approve a deal where something else is tendered for Cruz.

If they can't agree, I suspect that the rest of the league will see it as a jerk move by the guy getting Cruz.

My reputation as being fair to the people I play against is more important to me than getting over on someone else like that. To each his (or her) own.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top