What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Possible Collusion? (1 Viewer)

Is this an even trade?

  • Yes... nothing wrong with that deal.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No... it's obviously a bad trade.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
B

Bulldog96

Footballguy
Not sure if this is relevant here or not... Just curious what you guys think.

Regardless of their line-ups, based solely on the players at hand... was this a fair trade?

TEAM A (commish) trades

Tom Brady

Braylon Edwards

Todd Heap

Chicago DEF

to

TEAM B (cellar-dweller) for

Peyton Manning

Larry Fitzgerald

Kellen Winslow

Cowboys DEF

Generally, I really don't complain about trades. I figure as long as it's somewhat fair, it's a game and let 'em do what they want... BUT, this deal sucks IMO. Every player TEAM B gave up is a BIG improvement over what he was given in return (defenses aside). TEAM A made out big-time in this deal almost to the point of possibly colluding with this guy. What do you guys think?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If your playoffs begin in week 14 the trade deadline should have passed a couple weeks ago. With that said any "cellar dwellar" would not be able to unload his stars to the lowest bidder. Call them out on iy and it being fishy but limit your argument to that.

 
collusion is not defined as a trade you don't like.. you guys all throw it around when there is a trade you wish you would have made yourself but just b/c it's a bad trade in your eyes does not make it collusion

 
Manning > Brady

Fitz is much > Edwards (but only if hes healthy)

Heap is about equal to Winslow (probably slighty better)

Chicago Def is much much much > than Dallas

Yeah its a lopsided deal but not so much as you would think.

 
Righetti said:
collusion is not defined as a trade you don't like.. you guys all throw it around when there is a trade you wish you would have made yourself but just b/c it's a bad trade in your eyes does not make it collusion
Click to expand...
agreed. However, when you get downgraded in 3 out of 4 positions, and trade Manning for Brady and Fitzgerald, right whe he is coming back for Brylon "useless" Edwards, and arguably downgrae your tight end, although arguable I admit, it just seems fishy.I agree that there isn't enough to cll collusion, but i bet it was.
 
zoonation said:
Righetti said:
collusion is not defined as a trade you don't like.. you guys all throw it around when there is a trade you wish you would have made yourself but just b/c it's a bad trade in your eyes does not make it collusion
Click to expand...
agreed. However, when you get downgraded in 3 out of 4 positions, and trade Manning for Brady and Fitzgerald, right whe he is coming back for Brylon "useless" Edwards, and arguably downgrae your tight end, although arguable I admit, it just seems fishy.I agree that there isn't enough to cll collusion, but i bet it was.
Click to expand...
this comes down to one thing.. the guy who started this thread is hoping it's collusion which would give him reason to complain and get it reversed.. there is no evidence that it is collusion unless he is keeping that information secret which I doubt..I feel that people like this throw around collusion too often without knowing what it means.secondly, at what three positions are you getting downgraded in. You can say that Manning > Brady unless of course you don't expect Manning to play during FF playoffsEdwards vs Fitz for the rest of this season is closer than you thinkI think Heap is at least as good if not better Winslow, and if you just traded for Edwards you may agree.and the guy downgraded at the defensive spot.
 
How do you prove collusion? It seems like having proof would be impossible in almost all situation. So, basically, there is never any reason to veto a trade? Is that the consensus? I find an idiot who will give me Manning, Tomlinson, and Fitzgerald for Favre, Dillon, and Bruce. If there is no 100% definitive evidence of collusion, there would never be any reason to veto a trade like this?

I can see one point of view, in which one could say, who are you to judge the future production of the players involved? But then again, at this point in time, we all have a pretty good what individual players are worth.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
428143 said:
How do you prove collusion? It seems like having proof would be impossible in almost all situation. So, basically, there is never any reason to veto a trade? Is that the consensus? I find an idiot who will give me Manning, Tomlinson, and Fitzgerald for Favre, Dillon, and Bruce. If there is no 100% definitive evidence of collusion, there would never be any reason to veto a trade like this?
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly... Apparently, the deal has to be downright ridiculous (LT2 for Gado) to be considered collusion. The above deal is basically stacking one team and killing the bottom-dweller. In an exchange of players (1QB for 1QB, 1WR for 1WR, etc...) it's obvious Team A is taking advantage of Team B. Collusion? I don't know. That's why I posted it here, to get some opinions... Maybe had I posted "taking advantage of another team" the responses would've been different.Regardless, I guess in most leagues, anything goes. In a sense I wish I had found the guppie in this case. Of course, I don't think I would've even offered a low-ball deal like the one above. BUT ya gotta start somewhere when it comes to trade talks. It turns out that it was accepted by the guppie.
 
fitz is only playing in half the snaps this week. the cellar-dweller probably figured he NEEDS to win this week, and needed a solid WR to go into the game with. cleveland plays atl, and edwards COULD have a big game. he doesn't need two cleveland pass catchers, so he dumps winslow too.

its a fair deal. stop whining.

 
It is really hard for strangers to judge if it is collusion. Are these the kind of people that would do this? If they are, then this very well could be collusion because it is not a very even trade.

 
well what actually is collusion? as a commish i see it as where 1 or more team owners conspire against another team or teams with disregard of league rules. this happened a few years back in my league before i was commish. team with the 2nd pick in first round makes his pick ,and then waits for team with the fifth pick in the first round to make his pick, then the two teams trade those players on the spot. teams 3 and 4 were furious and the commish refused to make a call. as far as lopsided trades go, we now have three teams vote on all trades

 
Fantasy owners evaluate players differently. It's what makes the hobby interesting. I don't see anything wrong with the deal.

 
People have to remember that this person is in last place for a reason, and maybe thatis because he doesn't make the best of decisions. Being stupid or making bad decisions does not mean its collusion.

 
This is a terrible trade. What does team B say when asked why he did it? I dont think trades should be vetoed unless collusion is evident, but this is fishy.

 
What are the OVERALL rankings of the Chicago bears D? Dallas D?

In order to have a fair assessment, you need to post the complete teams or website and team names.

 
a_rackowski said:
What are the OVERALL rankings of the Chicago bears D? Dallas D? In order to have a fair assessment, you need to post the complete teams or website and team names.
Click to expand...
Rankings / Points in their perspective categories from the site : Team A#12 Tom Brady : 102pts#34 Braylon Edwards : 60 pts#5 Todd Heap : 66pts#2 Chicago DEF : 129 ptsTotal : 357 ptsTeam B#3 Peyton Manning : 158pts#49 Larry Fitzgerald : 46pts (5 weeks playing time)#4 Kellen Winslow : 68 pts#14 Dallas DEF : 70 ptsTotal : 340 ptsHowever, this wasn't a DEF for DEF trade... It was a Manning/Fitz for Brady/Edwards deal. They just threw in a DEF/TE to cover it up in my opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Who knows if it is collusion. Doesn't matter. It's a fishy trade that should never make it thru any type of review. If your league has none, nothing you can do about it. If your league has commisioner only veto, well, probably nothing you can do about it. If your league has all member vote, it should be shot down, and if it didn't get done, nothing you can do about it.

Bad trade for this late in the season.

 
I read an article somewhere recently that bemoaned the fact that Manning and the Indy offense will take the last couple weeks of the season off because of having home field wrapped up. Maybe this makes Manning less appealing to team B. But he's out of the playoff picture you say...well then I guess he should stop putting in lineups at which point there will be a thread started asking how to handle owners who have mailed it in.

The trade is bad, but not tear down the league and start over bad.

 
Bulldog, Lloyd asked a good question ... how did team B explain his/her rationale for the deal? That's usually a good starting point when investigating.

As for the deal itself, according to your numbers/rankings:

1. The TE's are a wash

2. The D advantage goes to Team B

3. The QB advantage goes to Team A

4. The WR's have that injury factor.

I think either of them can make a good argument for having received something of value in the deal. Your opinion of Fitz vs. Edwards isn't relevant. This deal should not be questioned unless there is some consideration included like a cut of the prize money, etc.

 
babyeater said:
Bulldog, Lloyd asked a good question ... how did team B explain his/her rationale for the deal? That's usually a good starting point when investigating.
Click to expand...
Actually, I see these guys once a year >> Draft Day. After that it's all submitted as usual via online. I haven't spoken to Team B and probably won't get the chance unless I PM him.I'm not so sure that it's a collusive deal. Maybe that was the wrong word to use. It's an odd deal this late in the season and defintitely a bit in favor of Team A. Considering their positions in the League, I saw it as a "fire sale" of sorts. I figure Team B is cashin' in his chips...

On a side note, I understand your point concerning my opinion of Fitz vs. Edwards, however in my defense, I'm sure I'm not alone when accessing the greater upside. Fitz is healthy now as well... although he may be limited this week, I'll take a 65% Fitz over 100% Edwards any day. Just my opinion.

 
shadyridr said:
Manning > BradyFitz is much > Edwards (but only if hes healthy)Heap is about equal to Winslow (probably slighty better)Chicago Def is much much much > than DallasYeah its a lopsided deal but not so much as you would think.
Click to expand...
Well if possibly planning for the playoffs, the Manning owner could be worried about a late season bench warming.
 
The guy with Manning probly is afraid the Colts will bench him during the fantasy playoffs.

Nice thought, but the Colts won't be doing that this year.

 
I think it's a fair trade, and my rationale is that he feels a) Fitz won't be back to 100%, and b) Manning will ride the pine in the super bowl.

my guess is that the guy feels like this is an even trade, when it's actually a lopsided trade.

But since he doesn't know it, let him get ripped off.

 
Last edited:
Why don't you go ask Team B why he thinks the trade helps his team before coming here?Further, what's up with:

Regardless of their line-ups, based solely on the players at hand... was this a fair trade?
Click to expand...
There's no way that any of us can make an informed decision without knowing that. Why are you not wanting anyone to consider the rest of their lineups? For all we know the guy giving up Peyton and Fitzgerald is starting McNabb, Steve Smith, Torry Holt, and Reggie Wayne and so he's trading a couple of backup players for the Chicago D.I'm not imagining that is the case given he's a cellar dweller, but I'm just getting really sick of people coming in here asking if this or that trade is collusion when they didn't even do what they should have in the first place and ask the owner for his reasoning why the trade was beneficial since his reasoning is the only one that matters... and then want us to ignore the factors that have to be taken into account like what the rest of his lineup is and if anyone else in the league would have made the guy a better offer.[/rant]
 
GregR said:
Why don't you go ask Team B why he thinks the trade helps his team before coming here?Further, what's up with:

Regardless of their line-ups, based solely on the players at hand... was this a fair trade?
Click to expand...
There's no way that any of us can make an informed decision without knowing that. Why are you not wanting anyone to consider the rest of their lineups? For all we know the guy giving up Peyton and Fitzgerald is starting McNabb, Steve Smith, Torry Holt, and Reggie Wayne and so he's trading a couple of backup players for the Chicago D.I'm not imagining that is the case given he's a cellar dweller, but I'm just getting really sick of people coming in here asking if this or that trade is collusion when they didn't even do what they should have in the first place and ask the owner for his reasoning why the trade was beneficial since his reasoning is the only one that matters... and then want us to ignore the factors that have to be taken into account like what the rest of his lineup is and if anyone else in the league would have made the guy a better offer.[/rant]
Click to expand...
Jeez.... sorry to piss in your Cheerios.I felt that posting their line-ups was basically irrelevant. Yeah, I can see your point in breaking down each individual's needs and wants, but based solely on the talent traded >>> what difference would that make?They BOTH traded a QBThey BOTH traded a WRThey BOTH swapped TE'sThey BOTH traded DEF/STIn the BIG picture... does the rest of their line-up really matter?They basically swapped position for position.The "meat" of the trade was basically Manning/Fitz in exchange for Brady/Edwards. Was it so much to ask for a generalized opinion of the players/trade at hand rather than bore people into reading and breaking down a 16 man roster player for player?Not to mention.. it IS an 11 team league. You can pretty much gather from that alone that their line-ups are somewhat equal in terms of "starting" talent and "bench" talent.I'm sorry you wasted your precious time in giving me your generous opinion, Greg.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
With a commish that deals like that, I would be looking at a new league with better rules. Everybody always wants to jump down a guys throat for posting this, but facts are facts and that trade sucks in anybodys book. In fantasy football Manning is without eqaul at the QB spot, Fitz is only about three times the better WR than Braylon (and I have Braylon on my roster), Winslow is as good as Heap now and a better futer pick, and team B did make out slighty in the D department. The deal sucks and I would bet a dollar to a donut it's a you scratch my back this years and I'll scratch yours next year. Purely bullcrap.

 
It's not that bad.

Manning may not get much action the last 2 or 3 weeks so Brady and Manning should be pretty close and maybe Brady ahead if Manning misses significant time if they clinch early.

Braylon and Fitz are pretty close the rest of the way with Fitz having a hammy injury

Heap and Winslow...meh, both are top TE's

Chicago huge upgrade over Dallas

Could actually turn out better for Team B for the remainder of the season and how far are they out of the playoffs/money. Perhaps a big risk was needed to try and make a comeback since what they had been doing wasn't working.

 
I'm glad my league, everyone knows everyone,...that way our commish calls a trade vote in,...he's gotta get 1 yes to approve it. There have been a couple trades where no one said yes,...but if my memory serves me correct, it was Joesph Addai, and Laurence Maroney for Travis Henry and Michael Clayton a few weeks ago,....seems unfair to some, that if 10 people just don't agree to a trade it doesn't pass, but if 10 out of 12 people don't think its fair,...it probably isn't. We have ours set up, to not just protect from dumping, but from people shooting themselves in the foot.

 
I cant believe this many replies and no mention of the records of the 2 teams. This is very important. If B still has a shot at the playoffs then this trade is not half bad.

As mentioned

TE = wash (note: winslow has bigger problems with knee than heap with ankle)

DEF = advantage B

Now here is where it gets complicated

WR = Fitz either returns to form or struggles (potential for reinjury - very possible since its a hammy - could be owner B's last shot to get something for Fitz?)

QB = Manning obviously better than Brady but there is the potential that Manning sits for the championship game. Brady during the playoffs is > Manning resting for the playoffs

Basically A could be risking losing a wr (if Fitz doesnt recover), his top TE (if Winslow's knee becomes a problem), and the best D (huge downgrade to Dal) to gain a qb who might not get full playing time in the championship game.

 
How can the commish justify this?

Manning is 50% better than Brady.

Fitzgerald is 20% better than Edwards

Heap and Winslow are virtually equal.

 
Bulldog96 said:
GregR said:
Why don't you go ask Team B why he thinks the trade helps his team before coming here?

Further, what's up with:

Regardless of their line-ups, based solely on the players at hand... was this a fair trade?
Click to expand...
There's no way that any of us can make an informed decision without knowing that. Why are you not wanting anyone to consider the rest of their lineups? For all we know the guy giving up Peyton and Fitzgerald is starting McNabb, Steve Smith, Torry Holt, and Reggie Wayne and so he's trading a couple of backup players for the Chicago D.I'm not imagining that is the case given he's a cellar dweller, but I'm just getting really sick of people coming in here asking if this or that trade is collusion when they didn't even do what they should have in the first place and ask the owner for his reasoning why the trade was beneficial since his reasoning is the only one that matters... and then want us to ignore the factors that have to be taken into account like what the rest of his lineup is and if anyone else in the league would have made the guy a better offer.

[/rant]
Click to expand...
Jeez.... sorry to piss in your Cheerios.I felt that posting their line-ups was basically irrelevant. Yeah, I can see your point in breaking down each individual's needs and wants, but based solely on the talent traded >>> what difference would that make?

They BOTH traded a QB

They BOTH traded a WR

They BOTH swapped TE's

They BOTH traded DEF/ST

In the BIG picture... does the rest of their line-up really matter?

They basically swapped position for position.

The "meat" of the trade was basically Manning/Fitz in exchange for Brady/Edwards. Was it so much to ask for a generalized opinion of the players/trade at hand rather than bore people into reading and breaking down a 16 man roster player for player?

Not to mention.. it IS an 11 team league. You can pretty much gather from that alone that their line-ups are somewhat equal in terms of "starting" talent and "bench" talent.

I'm sorry you wasted your precious time in giving me your generous opinion, Greg.
Click to expand...
We don't know if it matters or not. If some of those guys are bench players or they have similar options then yes it matters.Sorry if I jumped on you a bit, but almost every one of these kind of posts never include the actual information someone would need to give a well-informed opinion. After 10 weeks of it, it gets old.

 
GregR said:
Bulldog96 said:
GregR said:
Why don't you go ask Team B why he thinks the trade helps his team before coming here?

Further, what's up with:

Regardless of their line-ups, based solely on the players at hand... was this a fair trade?
Click to expand...
There's no way that any of us can make an informed decision without knowing that. Why are you not wanting anyone to consider the rest of their lineups? For all we know the guy giving up Peyton and Fitzgerald is starting McNabb, Steve Smith, Torry Holt, and Reggie Wayne and so he's trading a couple of backup players for the Chicago D.I'm not imagining that is the case given he's a cellar dweller, but I'm just getting really sick of people coming in here asking if this or that trade is collusion when they didn't even do what they should have in the first place and ask the owner for his reasoning why the trade was beneficial since his reasoning is the only one that matters... and then want us to ignore the factors that have to be taken into account like what the rest of his lineup is and if anyone else in the league would have made the guy a better offer.

[/rant]
Click to expand...
Jeez.... sorry to piss in your Cheerios.I felt that posting their line-ups was basically irrelevant. Yeah, I can see your point in breaking down each individual's needs and wants, but based solely on the talent traded >>> what difference would that make?

They BOTH traded a QB

They BOTH traded a WR

They BOTH swapped TE's

They BOTH traded DEF/ST

In the BIG picture... does the rest of their line-up really matter?

They basically swapped position for position.

The "meat" of the trade was basically Manning/Fitz in exchange for Brady/Edwards. Was it so much to ask for a generalized opinion of the players/trade at hand rather than bore people into reading and breaking down a 16 man roster player for player?

Not to mention.. it IS an 11 team league. You can pretty much gather from that alone that their line-ups are somewhat equal in terms of "starting" talent and "bench" talent.

I'm sorry you wasted your precious time in giving me your generous opinion, Greg.
Click to expand...
We don't know if it matters or not. If some of those guys are bench players or they have similar options then yes it matters.Sorry if I jumped on you a bit, but almost every one of these kind of posts never include the actual information someone would need to give a well-informed opinion. After 10 weeks of it, it gets old.
Click to expand...
No problem... I didn't expect the overall response I received. If I had, I definitely would've posted these earlier. Thanks to the pool for all their replies! Here's their line-ups for those interested :

TEAM A (post-trade)

Peyton Manning

Anthony Thomas

LT2

Isaac Bruce

Larry Fitz

Randy Moss

KW2

Jay Feely

Cowboys DEF

(bench)

Matt Leinart

Cedric Benson

Leon Washington

Derrick Mason

Jeremy Stevens

John Carney

Dolphins DEF

TEAM B

Tom Brady

Kevin Jones

Thomas Jones

Braylon Edwards

Keyshawn Johnson

Donte Stallworth

Todd Heap

Josh Brown

Bears DEF

(bench)

Mark Brunell

Justin Fargas

Jamal Lewis

Reggie Williams

Chris Cooley

Ryan Longwell

Colts DEF

-----------------------------------------

Team B upgraded his Defense... that's about it.

Anyhow...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bulldog96 said:
a_rackowski said:
What are the OVERALL rankings of the Chicago bears D? Dallas D?

In order to have a fair assessment, you need to post the complete teams or website and team names.
Click to expand...
Rankings / Points in their perspective categories from the site : Team A

#12 Tom Brady : 102pts

#34 Braylon Edwards : 60 pts

#5 Todd Heap : 66pts

#2 Chicago DEF : 129 pts

Total : 357 pts

Team B

#3 Peyton Manning : 158pts

#49 Larry Fitzgerald : 46pts (5 weeks playing time)

#4 Kellen Winslow : 68 pts

#14 Dallas DEF : 70 pts

Total : 340 pts

However, this wasn't a DEF for DEF trade... It was a Manning/Fitz for Brady/Edwards deal. They just threw in a DEF/TE to cover it up in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Pretty good coverup considering Team B got a 59 point pop on the D portion of the trade. Seriously, BD, I really don't see the problem here. We're talking 17 points spread over 8 players. You can dismiss the D & TE aspect of this trade all you want, but those points still count.

 
Bulldog96 said:
Not sure if this is relevant here or not... Just curious what you guys think. Regardless of their line-ups, based solely on the players at hand... was this a fair trade?TEAM A (commish) tradesTom BradyBraylon EdwardsTodd HeapChicago DEFto TEAM B (cellar-dweller) forPeyton ManningLarry FitzgeraldKellen WinslowCowboys DEFGenerally, I really don't complain about trades. I figure as long as it's somewhat fair, it's a game and let 'em do what they want... BUT, this deal sucks IMO. Every player TEAM B gave up is a BIG improvement over what he was given in return (defenses aside). TEAM A made out big-time in this deal almost to the point of possibly colluding with this guy. What do you guys think?
Click to expand...
In a redraft this is Ok because Manning may not even play in the playoffs, Fitz has been injured and who knows so the rst of the year he may lose to Edwards and the Chicago defense is awesome. Heap and Winslow is not that big a deal.
 
Bulldog96 said:
TEAM B (cellar-dweller) forPeyton ManningLarry FitzgeraldKellen WinslowCowboys DEF
Click to expand...
1) Its lopsided, but not collusion. This one certainly depends on the owners (Such as are they brothers? Do they have it out against a playoff bound team that Team A might get to face?)2) The Real Question: How did Team B become a cellar dweller with Manning? So he has zero shot of playoffs? I find that hard to believe.
 
Bulldog96 said:
The "meat" of the trade was basically Manning/Fitz in exchange for Brady/Edwards.
Click to expand...
Looks to me like the meat is Manning/Dallas for Brady/Chicago, with a few WRs and TEs thrown in.
#12 Tom Brady : 102pts#2 Chicago DEF : 129 pts#3 Peyton Manning : 158pts#14 Dallas DEF : 70 pts
Click to expand...
Based on those numbers alone, the upgrade to Chicago D is worth more than the upgrade to Manning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
It felt good on Draft Night but now you have to actually start'em...Who Should I Start Thread "OFFICIALLY UNOFFICIAL"
3 4 5
Replies
206
Views
8K
Hot Sauce Guy
Hot Sauce Guy
Ministry of Pain
Matchups to Love - Week 6
Replies
10
Views
2K
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain
Zow
Trade issue in new league - drama ensues
2 3
Replies
138
Views
9K
5-ish Finkle
5-ish Finkle

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top