Is this collusion? (1 Viewer)

[Wrigley]

Keeper league question

Owner still in hunt, starts off trade negotiations with teams no longer in it by stating:

"You don't need them, or you can't keep them.....so you might as well give/trade them to me"

Or is it just the nature of the beast, or am I just a grumpy old man?

 

[The Flying Elvis]

If the other owner just gives the player to him than it doesn't look good but if the actually make a trade, it's fine.

For example... If Team A is out of the playoffs, have 3 keepers set and say Jason Kipnis to spare, Team B offers him some sort of pick compensation for next year that's relatively fair, I think that is fine. It is basically the standard for keeper leagues when teams are out of the hunt. They sell off extra assets for future picks etc.

The other owner isn't being the smoothest in his negotiations but it's fine in my book. Just can't have teams just giving players up for no future asset. Wouldn't allow say Jason Kipnis for say Neil Walker just because the owners are friends or something.

 

[Don Quixote]

I think it's fair. I'd be worried if it was ex post facto, where a deal was reached and then an extra player is asked to be throw in.

If it's at the start of negotiations, it seems more a part of the give and take process. And it's not necessarily the case that the player is worthless, since they could be an asset to be traded to someone else.

 

[Wrigley]

These types of trades usually involve some pretty heavy hitters that the giving owner can't afford to keep the following year.

For instance: this trade happened right before our trade deadline last year

Pablo Sandoval

Hisashi Iwakuma

Brandon Beachy(injured at the time)

Gets:

Adrian Beltre

Kenley Jenson
Alex Rios

 

[The Flying Elvis]

These types of trades usually involve some pretty heavy hitters that the giving owner can't afford to keep the following year.

For instance: this trade happened right before our trade deadline last year

Pablo Sandoval

Hisashi Iwakuma

Brandon Beachy(injured at the time)

Gets:

Adrian Beltre

Kenley Jenson

Alex Rios

Well, that kinda looks like collusion. No future value or picks for his players. Can't really have that happening to upset the balance in the league. If Team A was getting any substantial picks or guys he could keep then I wouldn't be against it but it doesn't look to be the case.

 

[Wrigley]

These types of trades usually involve some pretty heavy hitters that the giving owner can't afford to keep the following year.

For instance: this trade happened right before our trade deadline last year

Pablo Sandoval

Hisashi Iwakuma

Brandon Beachy(injured at the time)

Gets:

Adrian Beltre

Kenley Jenson

Alex Rios

Well, that kinda looks like collusion. No future value or picks for his players. Can't really have that happening to upset the balance in the league. If Team A was getting any substantial picks or guys he could keep then I wouldn't be against it but it doesn't look to be the case.

Owner giving: said he really wanted a cheep Iwakuma

Owner getting: won it all

Our keeper system is a bit unique. Keeper values are based on where they are drafted each year, and increase by $2 each year a player is kept......this is done to force good players back into the pool

Beachy($2) and both Iwakuma($1) are both cheep enough to keep but so are Jansen($3), Beltre($5), and Rios($4).

edit: Just went back and looked over a past text: owner does plan on keeping Beltre

 

[RnR]

I was in a league where similar things happened at the trading deadline. By the next season, I was no longer in that league.

 

[Annyong]

Keeper league question

Owner still in hunt, starts off trade negotiations with teams no longer in it by stating:

"You don't need them, or you can't keep them.....so you might as well give/trade them to me"

Or is it just the nature of the beast, or am I just a grumpy old man?

It's not collusion because he says "Hey you don't need that guy and can't keep him"

It sounds like sour grapes that you didn't make a play for those guys first. These trades happen in keeper leagues. It is what it is. People value players differently.

 

[Wrigley]

Yeah, I appriciate owners valuing players differently, but one of these owners traded for keepers......and won

 

[RnR]

Yeah, I appriciate owners valuing players differently, but one of these owners traded for keepers......and won

It's collusion, and it runs rampant in keeper leagues. Flaw in the format.

 

[Annyong]

Yeah, I appriciate owners valuing players differently, but one of these owners traded for keepers......and won

It's collusion, and it runs rampant in keeper leagues. Flaw in the format.

2 owners making a trade to improve their teams is collusion? Maybe the guy trading Beltre had other options and couldnt fit him into his plans. Needed a cheaper keeper and flipped for what he thought was fair value.

Collusion to me, is one guy completely disregarding his team to help another guy win.

Trades like these are part of a keeper league, but this one isn't collusion.

 

[Eephus]

it's possible for a trade to help both teams who are playing by different strategies. Collusion is a pattern that develops over time.

 

[Annyong]

Full disclosure, I am in this league with Wrigley but not apart of this specific trade. Below is a note from the guy who got Beltre in this deal

All I said was, if you want these cheap keepers, you have to give me these guys since they have no value to you and you wont be keeping them.

No one likes trading with me early because they are trying to stop me from winning. So teams shop my offers and trade with others. When it comes down to the deadline, I was the only person at the top that had cheap guys left. So if someone wants to make a last minute deal they have no choice but to trade with me.

He OFFERED ME the trade because he wanted Iwakuma and Beachy, who was healthy at the time of the trade. I was in negotiations with another owner on a trade so i said if you want these guys, you need to step up. He did., by throwing in Rios. I didnt know Rios was gonna go nuts and steal like 20 bases after I got him.

 

[Wrigley]

Lol

 

[Wrigley]

Said trading teams potential keepers this year.....you would think they would be better?



Shin-Soo Choo 4
Jacoby Ellsbury 4
Brandon Phillips 4
Pablo Sandoval 4
Norichika Aoki 3
Allen Craig 3
Yadier Molina 3
Michael Cuddyer 2
Alejandro De Aza 2
Adam Lind 2
Matt Adams 1
Jed Lowrie 1
Moisés Sierra 1


Félix Hernández 5
Steve Cishek 3
Jason Grilli  3
Jake Peavy 3
Brandon Beachy 2
Lance Lynn 2
Trevor Rosenthal 2
Edinson Vólquez 2
Patrick Corbin 1
David Hale 1
Jim Henderson 1
Hisashi Iwakuma 1
Chris Tillman 1

Am I wrong to think his keepers would have been better if he didn't make this trade?

 

[The Flying Elvis]

Judging from what has been said, I don't think it is collusion but it isn't a trade I would be happy with if I was in the league. I fully understand keeper/dynasty leagues, future value and cheap keepers but it is tough to see how this was all done because some team wanted a $1 Iwakuma. Having said that, it doesn't look like collusion. Just some wacky trade valuations which can happen in keeper leagues.

I've been in situations like this before, trying to unload extra keepers etc without having any real leverage, and I won't trade a player just to trade him. Example might be, can't keep Verlander or Wright but need to offload him for a pick or lose him, I'll trade him for like a 4th which is cheap but I certainly wouldn't do it for like an 10th or something just to trade him. Tends to disrupt the competitive balance of a league.