Playoff teams trading with non-playoff teams (1 Viewer)

[scientist]

$25 buy-in work league, everybody knows everybody

First and second place split the pot

No prizes for consolation tourney

I'm in a work league where all the playoff spots have been clinched. One playoff bound team just traded Devery Henderson and Mewelde Moore for Thomas Jones, to a team with 2 wins for the year. Today is the day of the trade deadline. The argument is that I could've done the same thing because it's not against the rules. My response was I had the common decency to not look for trades with teams that have no chance for the playoffs.

Other info to note, the last place team doesn't know much about football and made the trade to compete "just for fun" in the consolation bracket.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

If it's a redraft league and not a dynasty or keeper league, then I don't see anything wrong with prohibiting non-playoff teams from trading with playoff teams. However, if it's a dynasty or keeper league, then you can restrict non-playoff owners from making their team better for the future. As far as your situation (assuming it's a redraft (yearly) league), either prohibit trading between non-playoff teams and playoff teams, or have a much earlier trading deadline.

 

[BusterTBronco]

I had the common decency to not look for trades with teams that have no chance for the playoffs.

I love it! When all else fails, pull out the "holier than thou" card.

 

[scientist]

I should've mentioned that...it's a redraft league. So you think since it wasn't against the rules, it doesn't constitute a veto? I've never vetoed anything, especially if it was just lopsided. Only if there is suspected collusion or, in a case like this, where one party has no basis for which to value the trade, would I have considered a veto. I say there's no basis on which to value the trade because one of the parties has absolutely nothing to lose.

 

[scientist]

I had the common decency to not look for trades with teams that have no chance for the playoffs.

I love it! When all else fails, pull out the "holier than thou" card.

I could've got Portis for Matt Ryan this same week from the 1-10 team who has never watched a full game of football in his life. Like the subtitle said, I thought there was sort of an unwritten rule against this kind of transaction. Rule of what? Decency or sportsmanship or whatever. If every team did this in our league and created a firesale, it would basically be a redraft right before the playoffs.I'm just curious as to how others consider this in their respective leagues. Do you go after trades with teams that have no shot at the playoffs and are not into fantasy football enough to realize they are impacting the outcome of the season?EDIT: Or am I just a nice-guys-finish-last sucker?

 

[Black]

Right, if it's redraft, lock the rosters, make a rule, call the Fire Dept, whatever. Decency or not, that is horse crap.

If it's dynasty or even 1 person keeper, you prob need to let the trade go.

I'm just waiting for the 'C' word to show up.

 

[lion_crazz]

In my league there is an unwritten rule, for sure. That kind of stuff should not happen. That is not fair and hurts the integrity of the league. What is stopping everyone from just stockpiling by taking advantage of the non-football fans and non-playoff teams?

 

[scientist]

I'm just waiting for the 'C' word to show up.

Collusion? Nah, it's just a matter of being in a league that's half amateurs. At this point, I'm just wondering how I should handle this in the future should it ever come up in more knowledgeable leagues.

 

[Utter Chaos]

We have a rule the prevents that sort of thing.

There's an unlimited trading period that runs through week 8. For weeks 9 to 12 you can only trade with teams 3 spots away from you in the standings. For instance the team in 8th place can only trade with teams in 5th-7th place or 9th-11th place. After week 12 there are no trades allowed.

It maybe not the prefect solution but it does help prevent lopsided trades like you mentioned.

 

[ourmanflint]

If it's a redraft league and not a dynasty or keeper league, then I don't see anything wrong with prohibiting non-playoff teams from trading with playoff teams. However, if it's a dynasty or keeper league, then you can restrict non-playoff owners from making their team better for the future. As far as your situation (assuming it's a redraft (yearly) league), either prohibit trading between non-playoff teams and playoff teams, or have a much earlier trading deadline.

Exactly you nailed it. This is the only way to prevent this mess from happening. Your league rules aren't sufficient.

 

[Black]

Dude....

Only if there is suspected collusion

One team is out. What the hell does he want Fred Taylor for, to pickup his clothes at the cleaners?You OWE it to your league to VETO that trade.

 

[Kruppe]

Make it a rule - when you are mathematically out of the playoffs you can't trade. Give me 1 good reason why a team thats been eliminated should be making a trade?

 

[Stinkin Ref]

the only solution is to make your trade deadline earlier....when nobody has been eliminated.....otherwise you will always have this issue....

we use week 7 to avoid this problem

and to address the other part of your question.....it has been my experience that "playoff type" teams often do not trade amongst themselves and it is usually a top team trading a lower team.....often trading depth at a couple of positions to aquire a stud at one position....very seldom have I seen two teams that are getting ready to make the playoffs trade each other after the mid point of the season

 

[Road Warriors]

There is a big problem with "unwritten rules"... They're not really rules. They're not enforcable.

This doesn't pass the sniff test to me, but I'd still be hard pressed to veto it. Its a legal trade within the rules you've agreed to play under. Live & learn, IMO.

And write down any unwritten rules you may want to enforce some day.

 

[mozzy84]

A team out of the playoffs should still be able to trade imo, no one wants to finish last. If they are just trading to help other teams thats a different story.

 

[Kinetic]

There is a big problem with "unwritten rules"... They're not really rules. They're not enforcable.This doesn't pass the sniff test to me, but I'd still be hard pressed to veto it. Its a legal trade within the rules you've agreed to play under. Live & learn, IMO.And write down any unwritten rules you may want to enforce some day.

What kind of rule wordage would stop this kind of action?

 

[Dragon1952]

There is a big problem with "unwritten rules"... They're not really rules. They're not enforcable.This doesn't pass the sniff test to me, but I'd still be hard pressed to veto it. Its a legal trade within the rules you've agreed to play under. Live & learn, IMO.And write down any unwritten rules you may want to enforce some day.

What kind of rule wordage would stop this kind of action?

Easy....."No team that has been eliminated from the playoffs can participate in any trades or WW moves". Same as locking the roster.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

There is a big problem with "unwritten rules"... They're not really rules. They're not enforcable.This doesn't pass the sniff test to me, but I'd still be hard pressed to veto it. Its a legal trade within the rules you've agreed to play under. Live & learn, IMO.And write down any unwritten rules you may want to enforce some day.

What kind of rule wordage would stop this kind of action?

"No trades will be allowed after week 7"the one thing you can count on is as long as you continue to allow allow trades late into the season, you will continue to have people complain and question trades....

 

[mrspree15]

There is a big problem with "unwritten rules"... They're not really rules. They're not enforcable.This doesn't pass the sniff test to me, but I'd still be hard pressed to veto it. Its a legal trade within the rules you've agreed to play under. Live & learn, IMO.And write down any unwritten rules you may want to enforce some day.

What kind of rule wordage would stop this kind of action?

Easy....."No team that has been eliminated from the playoffs can participate in any trades or WW moves". Same as locking the roster.

So now anyone who plays against an eliminated team has it extra easy because the team has zero hope of improving their team via WW?

 

[5-ish Finkle]

Nah, it's just a matter of being in a league that's half amateurs.

You can be a professional fantasy football player? AWESOME!? Where exactly do I sign up for my sponsors? That may possibly shut my wife up about "all the time I waste on this." Vegas, here I come!

Make it a rule - when you are mathematically out of the playoffs you can't trade. Give me 1 good reason why a team thats been eliminated should be making a trade?

Two came immediately to mind: "Total points" and "High weekly score gets cash." I could probably think of more, but you only asked for one.As someone else mentioned.....if it's unwritten, it's unenforcable. Write it down next year.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

There is a big problem with "unwritten rules"... They're not really rules. They're not enforcable.This doesn't pass the sniff test to me, but I'd still be hard pressed to veto it. Its a legal trade within the rules you've agreed to play under. Live & learn, IMO.And write down any unwritten rules you may want to enforce some day.

What kind of rule wordage would stop this kind of action?

Easy....."No team that has been eliminated from the playoffs can participate in any trades or WW moves". Same as locking the roster.

that is the wrong answer on so many levels.........do not do this.....