League message board discussions about players on the WW, (1 Viewer)

[JohnnyU]

Even though this discussion is about a baseball league, it also applies to FF.

An owner in my baseball league got pissed when I posted some info about Mr. Injury Dotel (who is on the WW) that someone should pick him up because Baltimore might be interested in him. I was hoping someone would drop a player that I may be intereted in picking up, thus the reason I was hyping Dotel. This owner feels that no one should post any information on players on the WW. He said that Dotel could be on someone's watch list and there's no reason to draw attention to players on the WW that may cause someone to pick him up. This is a dynasty baseball league and the draft was 3 years ago. There isn't a draft anymore. Owners are able to sign anyone in the world at any time as long as they aren't on another team roster.

I don't see anything wrong with discussing players not on rosters. I like the idea of hyping someone that I wouldn't want on my team in hopes that someone will pick him up and drop someone that I might be interested in. Is this bad? I like psychological warfare.

How DO YOU feel about this?

 

[awesomeness]

Even though this discussion is about a baseball league, it also applies to FF.

An owner in my baseball league got pissed when I posted some info about Mr. Injury Dotel (who is on the WW) that someone should pick him up because Baltimore might be interested in him. I was hoping someone would drop a player that I may be intereted in picking up, thus the reason I was hyping Dotel. This owner feels that no one should post any information on players on the WW. He said that Dotel could be on someone's watch list and there's no reason to draw attention to players on the WW that may cause someone to pick him up. This is a dynasty baseball league and the draft was 3 years ago. There isn't a draft anymore. Owners are able to sign anyone in the world at any time as long as they aren't on another team roster.

I don't see anything wrong with discussing players not on rosters. I like the idea of hyping someone that I wouldn't want on my team in hopes that someone will pick him up and drop someone that I might be interested in. Is this bad? I like psychological warfare.

How DO YOU feel about this?

i dont like baseball. Hence, i have no feelings towards your situation.

 

[JohnnyU]

Even though this discussion is about a baseball league, it also applies to FF.

An owner in my baseball league got pissed when I posted some info about Mr. Injury Dotel (who is on the WW) that someone should pick him up because Baltimore might be interested in him. I was hoping someone would drop a player that I may be intereted in picking up, thus the reason I was hyping Dotel. This owner feels that no one should post any information on players on the WW. He said that Dotel could be on someone's watch list and there's no reason to draw attention to players on the WW that may cause someone to pick him up. This is a dynasty baseball league and the draft was 3 years ago. There isn't a draft anymore. Owners are able to sign anyone in the world at any time as long as they aren't on another team roster.

I don't see anything wrong with discussing players not on rosters. I like the idea of hyping someone that I wouldn't want on my team in hopes that someone will pick him up and drop someone that I might be interested in. Is this bad? I like psychological warfare.

How DO YOU feel about this?

i dont like baseball. Hence, i have no feelings towards your situation.

In case you missed it, it also applies to fantasy footabll.

 

[mggoilers]

disinformation, hype, selling...all part of the game

 

[IZ4]

Even though this discussion is about a baseball league, it also applies to FF.

An owner in my baseball league got pissed when I posted some info about Mr. Injury Dotel (who is on the WW) that someone should pick him up because Baltimore might be interested in him. I was hoping someone would drop a player that I may be intereted in picking up, thus the reason I was hyping Dotel. This owner feels that no one should post any information on players on the WW. He said that Dotel could be on someone's watch list and there's no reason to draw attention to players on the WW that may cause someone to pick him up. This is a dynasty baseball league and the draft was 3 years ago. There isn't a draft anymore. Owners are able to sign anyone in the world at any time as long as they aren't on another team roster.

I don't see anything wrong with discussing players not on rosters. I like the idea of hyping someone that I wouldn't want on my team in hopes that someone will pick him up and drop someone that I might be interested in. Is this bad? I like psychological warfare.

How DO YOU feel about this?

i dont like baseball. Hence, i have no feelings towards your situation.

In case you missed it, it also applies to fantasy footabll.

Dotel is going to try football now?

 

[jasonbay]

Yes, I like this idea. I see nothing wrong with it.

 

[Couch Potato]

Here's how I answered this on the league message board in a league JohnnyU and I are in together (a FF league, not the BB league he's referring to):

I guess I sort of agree with the other owner, that commenting publicly on what other owners should do with specific players is sort of taboo. Commenting on a board like FBG is one thing, commenting specifically within your own league to your competition is another.I see players on the WW here that I'd own if rosters were greater than 26, and see teams owning lesser players that it makes no sense to own, but I'm not going to say anything because (1) what they do is their business, (2) there's no point in tipping anyone off to the detriment of the rest of the league (and to me), and (3) my opinion could be wrong. Just my 2 cents.

Another owner mentioned too that it's a little like talking about as-yet undrafted players during a draft. Some guys seem to think it's OK. It drives others nuts when guys do it. WW guys are obviously not as big a deal and I wouldn't be ruffled by it like I would at a draft but it's kind of the same principle.As for psychological warfare, JohnnyU, are you sure you're not a bit unarmed with that cap gun of yours? I prefer germ warfare personally. I'll lick your food if I want it. Works like a charm.

 

[FUBAR]

Would you hype someone whom you don't really want during a draft? Either answer might be right, but is it consistent with your feelings on WW?

I personally don't like the idea, but if your league doesn't have rules against it, it's part of the game.

 

[JohnnyU]

I'll lick your food if I want it. Works like a charm.

That's what she said ............jk Bruce.

 

[Pictus Cat]

I personally would not do it.

I might make fun of you for doing it.

I wouldn't be mad. I would definitely laugh at your attempt.

I've seen one guy do it to the same owner in my league time after time. I just say, "How did that work out for you?" He says "Fine." (Because he doesn't remember or care to look at it.) I grin with a low chuckle.

The other guy glares a little with a "I'll get you if you ruin this well" menace. Classic. Happens every year.

It's like watching someone look for keys everywhere when they are in their hand. Just entertained waiting for them to 'sherlock' the mystery.

 

[lord_helmet]

Its better than no post at all on the league mb!

 

[GregR_2]

I think lobbying for teams to take a specific action is in poor taste, whether it is one team being lobbied or whether it is directed to the entire league as a whole. I think it crosses the line of what's expected in a game of individual competition.

As far as how far I think it's ok to go before you cross the line, I guess I'm ok with someone making an observation and letting people's own thoughts take them to whatever conclusion and specific actions they decide on. For example on things I'm generally ok with:

"Glad there was still a backup QB left at my pick, the way they were going I thought they might all be gone before I picked again," would be, to me, a decent way to make people who don't yet have a backup QB reconsider their team needs (since I want QBs to be taken since I don't need more) without advocating that someone take Matt Schaub and Jake Cutler because they are the best ones left.

"I hated paying that much for my RBs, but what could I do? I was worried the ones worth starting would run out and I'd get caught without two starters." Big difference between making a statement about my decisions and having other owners without RBs start to reconsider what a starting RB is worth at this point in the auction and if they need to overpay just to get one.... vs advocating, "There are teams without any starting RBs yet... it sure would be great to stick them by really bidding up the prices on the few that are left."

So what might I have done in the OP's shoes? Maybe I'd have said something like, "Man, I wish we could get some more roster spots in this league. I hate seeing players on waivers who should be on a roster."

 

[jscout]

Nothing wrong with hyping a player. It's no different than the reverse, downplaying a player you covet. It's all part of the game any any astute player can see through your ploy. If I were in your league and saw that I'd do one of two things:

1) If there are guppies I'm also preying on, I'd sit back and wait to see if your ploy worked so that I can cherrypick and maybe beat you to it.

2) If there wasn't anything realistic that could come of it, I'd post to call you out, just to get your goat. Because after all you are a competitor of mine and exposing you as being untrustworthy might worsen your position if and when we're competing to make trades with other owners. I wouldn't be a real shark if I didn't eat another shark.

 

[Bill]

i don't like it .

 

[Liquid Tension]

Even though this discussion is about a baseball league, it also applies to FF.

An owner in my baseball league got pissed when I posted some info about Mr. Injury Dotel (who is on the WW) that someone should pick him up because Baltimore might be interested in him. I was hoping someone would drop a player that I may be intereted in picking up, thus the reason I was hyping Dotel. This owner feels that no one should post any information on players on the WW. He said that Dotel could be on someone's watch list and there's no reason to draw attention to players on the WW that may cause someone to pick him up. This is a dynasty baseball league and the draft was 3 years ago. There isn't a draft anymore. Owners are able to sign anyone in the world at any time as long as they aren't on another team roster.

I don't see anything wrong with discussing players not on rosters. I like the idea of hyping someone that I wouldn't want on my team in hopes that someone will pick him up and drop someone that I might be interested in. Is this bad? I like psychological warfare.

How DO YOU feel about this?

No issue at all. Would it be different if you called a guy and gave him your opinion on a trade or just told him he should look into picking up a player? No. I have called guys and offered to help their team by saying they should pick up so and so...this making sure that my opponent can't get the player and also helping this team out (usually a bottom dweller)Edited to add that in thinking through times where this may be less appropriate, during a draft it is not real good protocol to give someone some help on a pick, but many times when we draft in person, people ask questions; it is what it is. We have people put out information with the intent of giving less leverage to a player on a good team. For example, someone may come out and say, wow, after that performance "Bob" will probably be trying to trade "Michael Turner" for more value than he is really worth. Thus reducing the value in selling high to some people (may work may not?) As long as there is no collusion, I am OK with it, but it still should be friendly

 

[Crippler]

It is just a read

No different than owners doing mock drafts for dynasty leagues or even doing team comparisons. The one who is doing usually has a reason for doing it and either wont give his hand away or will use the report for other purposes. Always a little disinformation out there

Activity like this is what makes a league good usually. Plus all part of the game of warfare. No differnt than attempting to get an owner to make a deal and using the reasoning behind your attempt.

 

[DWidmar]

I think mentioning a specific player is not cool. Some owners might perceive that as a unfair advantage to their competition who might not be as aware and all of the sudden the, not as aware owner, see's the post and they go get that guy.

An example I can think of is Ryan Grant. I wanted to pick up this guy but I thought the RB situation in Green Bay was going to be a mess for a while when everyone was healthy. I did see him pimped here on FBG but I was still hesitant due to roster space and I am pretty solid at RB.(I should have picked him up) His first big blow up game was on a Monday night and he was still a free agent. I don't think it would be appropriate for me to post on our message board that Grant was still a free agent. An owner who does not think about waiver wire pick ups might have seen that and picked him up causing other owners in the league to be frustrated with me because now they missed out on their chance or they were at work and could not pick him up and if I hadn't pointed it out they might have had a chance.

I think misleading people about how you feel on a certain player or which way your going to draft is part of the game. Pointing out specific player and bringing it to all owners attention is not in the spirit of competition. I understand your intentions and as a whole they are not that bad but if it starts with that it can lead to other ways of posting similar things which will get worse. Such as, hey specific owner, I saw you are thin at RB, just wanted you to know that Ryan Grant was still a free agent. (posting this on the team's message board.) Then you have to decide what is acceptable and what is not when it comes to pointing out specific players.

 

[pollardsvision]

personally, i try not to discuss free-agents on the message board, but i certainly have no problem with others doing it.

 

[Wilbur Wood]

My $0.03

I don't like the tactic as it is a slippery slope. Here are a few examples of behavior that are similar and to me you can't really draw a line and say #1 and #3 are kosher, but #2 crosses some "ethical line".

#1 In a FF league, your main competitor for a playoff slot is playing someone who owns a New England RB that he might very well start. Is it cool for you to post on the league message board an Alert?: David Yudkin of FBG, just indicated via his inside sources that Maroney will not play this weekend and that Heath Evans (who happens to be on the league WW) will be the feature RB this week.

#2 Roll the tape back 2 to 3 years when Mark Prior still had some "value". In a Dynsaty baseball league is it okay to post a link on the league wide message board to an article written by Mike Marshall pointing out fatal flaws in Prior's pitching mechanics and the opinion that the initial bout of shoulder discomfort that he experienced in the prior season would invariably degenerate further and eventually need surgery? Thus, devaluing Prior's trade value on the roster of your chief competitor in the league.

#3 In the middle of a FF (or FB) draft, there is another owner who always does a great job in picking sleepers. You are maxed out at the skill position and yourself only need to fill a Defense, Kicker and Tight End with your last 3 picks. Is it cool for you to start shouting out things a few picks in advance of the "shrewd" owner's own pick that "Hey FBG is touting Anquan Boldin as a major rookie WR sleeper in Arizona"?

To me they are all forms of "dirty tricks". If your league culture is one in which "anything goes" and you have a wild in person draft in which any form gamesmenship goes and people regulary use smear tactics on the message board, then and only then would I say that such tactics are "fair game".

However, in all other situations I would say NO and would not personally engage in this type of behavior. If you are talking about a league that involves money and people that are just "internet" acquaintenances who do this for a hobby, I would advise against this type of behavior. You mention that this was a Dynasty League, so presumably continuity and having the league be an enjoyable experience for folks is important -- probably not a good idea to initiate these types of tactics.

Last point, I don't know when you state "my baseball league" if you actually run this league (I know that you are commishioner in some football leagues), but I also think that it is important for the Commishioner of a league to have a bit of a higher standard of behavior and not be the one who tries to bend rules or initiate dirty tricks.

 

[sparkky]

I don't think it really matters. No owner worth his salt is going to say what he "really" thinks or believe what others "really" think.

 

[The Dawg]

Is it unethical? Perhaps. I know in my league I always hated it when other owners shared information. But is it technically against the rules? No, unless your league imposes some sort of gag order by writing it into the rules.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

Even though this discussion is about a baseball league, it also applies to FF.

An owner in my baseball league got pissed when I posted some info about Mr. Injury Dotel (who is on the WW) that someone should pick him up because Baltimore might be interested in him. I was hoping someone would drop a player that I may be intereted in picking up, thus the reason I was hyping Dotel. This owner feels that no one should post any information on players on the WW. He said that Dotel could be on someone's watch list and there's no reason to draw attention to players on the WW that may cause someone to pick him up. This is a dynasty baseball league and the draft was 3 years ago. There isn't a draft anymore. Owners are able to sign anyone in the world at any time as long as they aren't on another team roster.

I don't see anything wrong with discussing players not on rosters. I like the idea of hyping someone that I wouldn't want on my team in hopes that someone will pick him up and drop someone that I might be interested in. Is this bad? I like psychological warfare.

How DO YOU feel about this?

I take it your a Colts fan.I would have thought you would do something like this, not surprised in the least.

Just like the Colts piping in noise.

I do think it's wrong and wouldn't do it, but again thats just me.

 

[massraider]

You should be able to say whatever the heck you want on a message board. If some other guy has a player on his "watch list", and you aren't interested in him, it's in your best interest to get him on someone's team, and maybe someone you DO like will shake loose. Not sure why I typed all that, as you pretty much said the same thing.\

Hyping and running down players, the psychology of it all, is part of the game. And no one likes when someone starts talking about a sleeper, but again, it happens.

This guy needs to either fish or cut bait with this player, now that the cat's out of the bag.

 

[fatkid]

I think the answer depends on the league culture. Some leagues are fun leagues, and this kind of thing should be taboo. Other leagues are competitive. In a competitive league, anything short of collusion goes.

 

[massraider]

Wow. I just re-read a bunch of these posts.

I can't believe how many people are bothered by this. I see zero problem with discussing free agents. I can't even think of a decent argument against it. Slippery slope? They're free agents. No owner has any rights to them, even if they were the 'first' to notice a player. If I am fighting for a division lead, and Ryan Grant is a FA, you bet I am going to do all that I can to see that my main competition doesn't get him. NFL teams call each other all the time, and share info, but fantasy football is such serious business that we can't call our buddy and tip him to a guy that may help him.

I'll tell you the slippery slope: You start telling people not to discuss free agents, because it may help out someone that was unaware, the next step, obviously, is to ban any owner from reading FBG or Rotoworld. Everyone just gets to read USA Today, and let the best man win.

Really, step back and look what you are suggesting here, people.

Lordy.

 

[Wilbur Wood]

Wow. I just re-read a bunch of these posts.

I can't believe how many people are bothered by this. I see zero problem with discussing free agents. I can't even think of a decent argument against it. Slippery slope? They're free agents. No owner has any rights to them, even if they were the 'first' to notice a player. If I am fighting for a division lead, and Ryan Grant is a FA, you bet I am going to do all that I can to see that my main competition doesn't get him. NFL teams call each other all the time, and share info, but fantasy football is such serious business that we can't call our buddy and tip him to a guy that may help him.

I'll tell you the slippery slope: You start telling people not to discuss free agents, because it may help out someone that was unaware, the next step, obviously, is to ban any owner from reading FBG or Rotoworld. Everyone just gets to read USA Today, and let the best man win.

Really, step back and look what you are suggesting here, people.

Lordy.

That is fine, then there should nothing wrong with me posting my opinions about any player in the NFL or MLB, be it a Free Agent, someone on my roster or your roster. Let everything go. Create an environment in which it is acceptable to highlight any bad news on any player that is not on your roster to cheapen the worth of that asset. To me, I'd prefer not to play in that kind of league as it implies that "anything goes" except what is clearly written in the rules and creates a very low ethical standard of behavior. Even Hank Steinbrenner doesn't publicly decry that other team's players or free agents are damaged goods as there is a standard of behavior that is expected.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

I discuss players all the time with other owners. I don't see this being any different than that. I doubt there is anything breaking news on a league board that is on most if not every news service.

 

[Two Deep]

Here's how I answered this on the league message board in a league JohnnyU and I are in together (a FF league, not the BB league he's referring to):

I guess I sort of agree with the other owner, that commenting publicly on what other owners should do with specific players is sort of taboo. Commenting on a board like FBG is one thing, commenting specifically within your own league to your competition is another.I see players on the WW here that I'd own if rosters were greater than 26, and see teams owning lesser players that it makes no sense to own, but I'm not going to say anything because (1) what they do is their business, (2) there's no point in tipping anyone off to the detriment of the rest of the league (and to me), and (3) my opinion could be wrong. Just my 2 cents.

Another owner mentioned too that it's a little like talking about as-yet undrafted players during a draft. Some guys seem to think it's OK. It drives others nuts when guys do it. WW guys are obviously not as big a deal and I wouldn't be ruffled by it like I would at a draft but it's kind of the same principle.As for psychological warfare, JohnnyU, are you sure you're not a bit unarmed with that cap gun of yours? I prefer germ warfare personally. I'll lick your food if I want it. Works like a charm.

I don't like when owners bring attention to a player either during draft or in -season waiver wires. Each owner should be responsible for their own scouting.

 

[massraider]

Wow. I just re-read a bunch of these posts.

I can't believe how many people are bothered by this. I see zero problem with discussing free agents. I can't even think of a decent argument against it. Slippery slope? They're free agents. No owner has any rights to them, even if they were the 'first' to notice a player. If I am fighting for a division lead, and Ryan Grant is a FA, you bet I am going to do all that I can to see that my main competition doesn't get him. NFL teams call each other all the time, and share info, but fantasy football is such serious business that we can't call our buddy and tip him to a guy that may help him.

I'll tell you the slippery slope: You start telling people not to discuss free agents, because it may help out someone that was unaware, the next step, obviously, is to ban any owner from reading FBG or Rotoworld. Everyone just gets to read USA Today, and let the best man win.

Really, step back and look what you are suggesting here, people.

Lordy.

That is fine, then there should nothing wrong with me posting my opinions about any player in the NFL or MLB, be it a Free Agent, someone on my roster or your roster. Let everything go. Create an environment in which it is acceptable to highlight any bad news on any player that is not on your roster to cheapen the worth of that asset. To me, I'd prefer not to play in that kind of league as it implies that "anything goes" except what is clearly written in the rules and creates a very low ethical standard of behavior. Even Hank Steinbrenner doesn't publicly decry that other team's players or free agents are damaged goods as there is a standard of behavior that is expected.

Well, Johnny U was actually talking about talking a player UP, essentially saying something good about a player. This other owner has a problem because he was keeping an eye on him, and didn't like owners that maybe didn't know about him being alerted to him. I find that ridiculous, really.To respond to what you said, I think using the word "ethical" is a bit dramatic. Low ethical behavior to me is closer to trading an injured player to an unknowing owner, or trade collusion. Saying bad things about a player? That's just talking.

 

[massraider]

Just to expand on this a bit, using Ryan Grant as an example.

Let's say my team is one of the clear top teams in a league. My main competition just lost their top RB with an injury.

Meantime, word around the Packers message boards is that Ryan Grant is gonna take over for B. Jackson, who, as it turns out, sucks.

The team with the #1 WW pick isn't the strongest owner in the world, and generally pays his fees, drafts his team, then watches other teams win. In short, he is no threat.

Now, I won't pick up Ryan Grant, because I have a late pick, and my main competition is gonna scoop him up before me.

So is it unethical to call my clueless buddy, letting him know he might be able to improve his team by snapping up Grant? This keeps Grant from hurting my team, as my clueless buddy is no threat, and keeps my main competition in need of a RB.

If so, why is that unethical?

 

[Wilbur Wood]

Just to expand on this a bit, using Ryan Grant as an example.Let's say my team is one of the clear top teams in a league. My main competition just lost their top RB with an injury.Meantime, word around the Packers message boards is that Ryan Grant is gonna take over for B. Jackson, who, as it turns out, sucks.The team with the #1 WW pick isn't the strongest owner in the world, and generally pays his fees, drafts his team, then watches other teams win. In short, he is no threat. Now, I won't pick up Ryan Grant, because I have a late pick, and my main competition is gonna scoop him up before me.So is it unethical to call my clueless buddy, letting him know he might be able to improve his team by snapping up Grant? This keeps Grant from hurting my team, as my clueless buddy is no threat, and keeps my main competition in need of a RB. If so, why is that unethical?

You've drifted off point here. The issue is "publicly posting this type of stuff on the message board", not privately callling someone to coach him on how to manage his team. Personally I don't engage in either behavior. I know how I'd react to being on the receiving end of such a call, especially from an "internet-only" acquaintence. It might play out something like this:Other owner: Hi Wilbur, its John Doe from FF Zealots Dynasty league. It would be a great idea for you to pick up Ryan Grant this week.Me: Why so?Other owner: You have the #1 pick and could really use him this week.Me: Why are you taking such an interest in what player I should add to my roster.Other owner: I don't want the team that I'm playing this week to pick up Grant because they're weak at RB and they could really use him and they have lower waiver claim than I do.Me: So even though my team is bad this year and this is a Dynasty League and I may not want Grant long term, I should still pick him up because it would help your team?Other owner: YesMe: What's in it for me? (this would be my tact just to flush out how far this guy is willing to go and see if hed go so far as collusion)Sorry, MassRaider I just would prefer not to play in those types of leagues.

 

[massraider]

Just to expand on this a bit, using Ryan Grant as an example.Let's say my team is one of the clear top teams in a league. My main competition just lost their top RB with an injury.Meantime, word around the Packers message boards is that Ryan Grant is gonna take over for B. Jackson, who, as it turns out, sucks.The team with the #1 WW pick isn't the strongest owner in the world, and generally pays his fees, drafts his team, then watches other teams win. In short, he is no threat. Now, I won't pick up Ryan Grant, because I have a late pick, and my main competition is gonna scoop him up before me.So is it unethical to call my clueless buddy, letting him know he might be able to improve his team by snapping up Grant? This keeps Grant from hurting my team, as my clueless buddy is no threat, and keeps my main competition in need of a RB. If so, why is that unethical?

You've drifted off point here. The issue is "publicly posting this type of stuff on the message board", not privately callling someone to coach him on how to manage his team. Personally I don't engage in either behavior. I know how I'd react to being on the receiving end of such a call, especially from an "internet-only" acquaintence. It might play out something like this:

I drifted off point on purpose, because I think my example is at least worthy of being called shady.Now, it may depend on the kind of relationship the owners have. I'm in Zealots as well, and wouldn't make the phone call you described above. However, I also am in a league with friends, and frankly, I discuss roster moves with the other owners all the time. We give each other advice all the time. Sometimes I hold back information, if it's in my best interest.The difference between having a discussion with friends, and posting on a league message board, is lost on me.

 

[massraider]

Me: So even though my team is bad this year and this is a Dynasty League and I may not want Grant long term, I should still pick him up because it would help your team?Other owner: Yes

By the way, this is when you stretched it, to make you point.

 

[az_prof]

Just to expand on this a bit, using Ryan Grant as an example.Let's say my team is one of the clear top teams in a league. My main competition just lost their top RB with an injury.Meantime, word around the Packers message boards is that Ryan Grant is gonna take over for B. Jackson, who, as it turns out, sucks.The team with the #1 WW pick isn't the strongest owner in the world, and generally pays his fees, drafts his team, then watches other teams win. In short, he is no threat. Now, I won't pick up Ryan Grant, because I have a late pick, and my main competition is gonna scoop him up before me.So is it unethical to call my clueless buddy, letting him know he might be able to improve his team by snapping up Grant? This keeps Grant from hurting my team, as my clueless buddy is no threat, and keeps my main competition in need of a RB. If so, why is that unethical?

This is a perfect hypothetical example: my answer is an unequivocable NO, it is not unethical. Ethics would be cheating, colluding. It IS hardball tactics, and if you do this sort of thing you can't expect to make too many friends in your league and you should expect people to do this to you. The guy you describe as your competition may choose not to trade with you in the future. But if there are no explicit rules against it I can't say that it is unethical.

 

[Couch Potato]

Just to expand on this a bit, using Ryan Grant as an example.

Let's say my team is one of the clear top teams in a league. My main competition just lost their top RB with an injury.

Meantime, word around the Packers message boards is that Ryan Grant is gonna take over for B. Jackson, who, as it turns out, sucks.

The team with the #1 WW pick isn't the strongest owner in the world, and generally pays his fees, drafts his team, then watches other teams win. In short, he is no threat.

Now, I won't pick up Ryan Grant, because I have a late pick, and my main competition is gonna scoop him up before me.

So is it unethical to call my clueless buddy, letting him know he might be able to improve his team by snapping up Grant? This keeps Grant from hurting my team, as my clueless buddy is no threat, and keeps my main competition in need of a RB.

If so, why is that unethical?

It's unethical because people are responsible for managing their own teams, and you should butt out. If 'unethical' isn't the right word for it, I'll at least say it's tacky as hell and I'd have very little respect for anyone doing this. Very poor conduct IMO and not in the spirit of fair competition or good sportsmanship. If those things don't matter to you, and it's only about gaining any edge possible to win, good luck with that kind of mentality. If you're that desperate to win at FF then I'd say you have bigger issues. I hold myself to a higher standard and seem to win just fine without stooping to such smarmy tactics.

 

[massraider]

Just to expand on this a bit, using Ryan Grant as an example.

Let's say my team is one of the clear top teams in a league. My main competition just lost their top RB with an injury.

Meantime, word around the Packers message boards is that Ryan Grant is gonna take over for B. Jackson, who, as it turns out, sucks.

The team with the #1 WW pick isn't the strongest owner in the world, and generally pays his fees, drafts his team, then watches other teams win. In short, he is no threat.

Now, I won't pick up Ryan Grant, because I have a late pick, and my main competition is gonna scoop him up before me.

So is it unethical to call my clueless buddy, letting him know he might be able to improve his team by snapping up Grant? This keeps Grant from hurting my team, as my clueless buddy is no threat, and keeps my main competition in need of a RB.

If so, why is that unethical?

It's unethical because people are responsible for managing their own teams, and you should butt out. If 'unethical' isn't the right word for it, I'll at least say it's tacky as hell and I'd have very little respect for anyone doing this. Very poor conduct IMO and not in the spirit of fair competition or good sportsmanship. If those things don't matter to you, and it's only about gaining any edge possible to win, good luck with that kind of mentality. If you're that desperate to win at FF then I'd say you have bigger issues. I hold myself to a higher standard and seem to win just fine without stooping to such smarmy tactics.

I think people are having trouble coming up with the right word because they can't really put their finger on why it's wrong. They just don't like it. And tacky is a long way from unethical.As for the 'high standard' line of reasoning, well, one man's bush league is another man's gamesmanship. That argument doesn't apply here, IMO.

My friends will discuss trade offers, either in details, or in general terms, all the time. We will discuss free agents. Lineup dilemmas. We will knock other teams, their players, and their drafting history. It's all done in the name of "fun".

Now, I have refused to discuss things with other owners, but I have certainly made recommendations that I thought would help me as well as them. Is that bush league?

 

[Couch Potato]

Just to expand on this a bit, using Ryan Grant as an example.

Let's say my team is one of the clear top teams in a league. My main competition just lost their top RB with an injury.

Meantime, word around the Packers message boards is that Ryan Grant is gonna take over for B. Jackson, who, as it turns out, sucks.

The team with the #1 WW pick isn't the strongest owner in the world, and generally pays his fees, drafts his team, then watches other teams win. In short, he is no threat.

Now, I won't pick up Ryan Grant, because I have a late pick, and my main competition is gonna scoop him up before me.

So is it unethical to call my clueless buddy, letting him know he might be able to improve his team by snapping up Grant? This keeps Grant from hurting my team, as my clueless buddy is no threat, and keeps my main competition in need of a RB.

If so, why is that unethical?

It's unethical because people are responsible for managing their own teams, and you should butt out. If 'unethical' isn't the right word for it, I'll at least say it's tacky as hell and I'd have very little respect for anyone doing this. Very poor conduct IMO and not in the spirit of fair competition or good sportsmanship. If those things don't matter to you, and it's only about gaining any edge possible to win, good luck with that kind of mentality. If you're that desperate to win at FF then I'd say you have bigger issues. I hold myself to a higher standard and seem to win just fine without stooping to such smarmy tactics.

I think people are having trouble coming up with the right word because they can't really put their finger on why it's wrong. They just don't like it. And tacky is a long way from unethical.As for the 'high standard' line of reasoning, well, one man's bush league is another man's gamesmanship. That argument doesn't apply here, IMO.

My friends will discuss trade offers, either in details, or in general terms, all the time. We will discuss free agents. Lineup dilemmas. We will knock other teams, their players, and their drafting history. It's all done in the name of "fun".

Now, I have refused to discuss things with other owners, but I have certainly made recommendations that I thought would help me as well as them. Is that bush league?

There are a lot of guys on both sides of this discussion in this thread so I suppose it's a matter of taste. To me it's just an icky way of doing things and seems (sorry if I offend) a little bit pathetic to go to such measures in an effort to gain an advantage. It's just not my style. But I'll say this, that the message board posting JohnnyU is talking about would be a minor annoyance and not something I'd be all bent out of shape about, while someone actually contacting an owner to tell him to add a player so another owner doesn't get him is IMO 10x worse. To each his own I guess. I've been reading your posts for quite awhile and we agree on many things. This just isn't one of them.

 

[massraider]

There are a lot of guys on both sides of this discussion in this thread so I suppose it's a matter of taste. To me it's just an icky way of doing things and seems (sorry if I offend) a little bit pathetic to go to such measures in an effort to gain an advantage. It's just not my style. But I'll say this, that the message board posting JohnnyU is talking about would be a minor annoyance and not something I'd be all bent out of shape about, while someone actually contacting an owner to tell him to add a player so another owner doesn't get him is IMO 10x worse. To each his own I guess. I've been reading your posts for quite awhile and we agree on many things. This just isn't one of them.

Not offended at all. you aren't the first to remark on my "moral flexibility". :X

 

[mozzy84]

of course you can do that. poor taste, who cares, anyone with half a brain could figure out what you're doing, its a fantasy game and a message board. just the fact that it would actually bother people makes me

 

[Couch Potato]

There are a lot of guys on both sides of this discussion in this thread so I suppose it's a matter of taste. To me it's just an icky way of doing things and seems (sorry if I offend) a little bit pathetic to go to such measures in an effort to gain an advantage. It's just not my style. But I'll say this, that the message board posting JohnnyU is talking about would be a minor annoyance and not something I'd be all bent out of shape about, while someone actually contacting an owner to tell him to add a player so another owner doesn't get him is IMO 10x worse. To each his own I guess. I've been reading your posts for quite awhile and we agree on many things. This just isn't one of them.

Not offended at all. you aren't the first to remark on my "moral flexibility".

Well, my post #35 was more harshly worded than it should have been. S### happening here at home caused me to slip a little extra attitude into my post. So, apologies. I generally try not to be as contentious as that.

 

[trader jake]

I understand CP's take on this and agree with him to a certain degree. If forced to decide all in or not though...I'm saying it's all good to post it on the message board. What's the point of having a leaguewide message board if nobody posts their thoughts on players/teams/trades/etc?

It's more about timing than the players anyway. Most league are full of guys who know who could bust out, but the above average owners will consistently snag that player a week before everyone else does. If I can get some owner to grab that guy (who really isn't that guy to me) and it frees up another player I'm interested in or he has to burn some cash to do it...even better.