Should dynasty leagues have trade deadlines? (1 Viewer)

[Mister CIA]

Some of you are trying awfully hard to convince others to not have a trade deadline. The arguments you are using for your side are not very convincing and/or open the door for more issues had there been a trade deadline in place.

To each their own. The sword cuts both ways though. If you enjoy not having a trade deadline, go for it. But, that opens the door to worse things happening long term than the flip side. So, have fun fleecing an owner or two this year or next year and then leaving the league after you get your money. Yeah, sell your team this year to win this year and then leave the league. Awesome!

I do all of my fleecing in the months April through August.

 

[Mister CIA]

Whole lotta misconception running wild in this thread. No trade deadline DNE owner getting fleeced. If I'm a playoff contender needing a boost down the stretch, I don't give away the crown jewels; instead I simply overbuy. For example, this past week I traded LeSean McCoy and my second rounder for Jamaal Charles. I'm in the playoffs with a decent chance of winning the league Super Bowl, while things are looking up for 2-8 team in 2013.

If a trade benefits both teams and you have a problem with it, then you need to look in the mirror.

 

[SSOG]

The issue is not really about being above-the-board, it is a matter of fairness and the idea of buying a championship at the last minute rather than planning ahead with your roster before the trade deadline (that "strategy" thing) which seems again to touch on the point that Dropkick raised which the "no trade deadline" people have never directly responded to (outside of answering the question with a question):

Yes, there is a "magic" timeline as there is in the NFL and other sports. We don't need posts telling us how fantasy differs from the NFL. How about asking yourself "why does the NFL have a trade deadline"? Why do sports at the professional and amateur level have rules about a players play-off eligibility? In MLB, you have to be on the roster as of August 31st. Perhaps they want a "true" champion rather than a team of ringers.

You keep using the word "buying". That's apt- "buying" makes it explicit that you are incurring a cost. To increase your chance of winning a championship this year, the cost you pay is decreasing your chances of winning a championship next year. Teams have limited assets, and if they want to sacrifice future assets to secure present assets, I'm 100% okay with that. Again, the key words here are "buy" and "sacrifice". And none of this guarantees a championship- it very marginally increases chances of winning, and very marginally decreases chances of winning in the future.. I don't get why it's okay to buy a championship in week 13, but not week 15.

And you and the other "no trade deadline" supporters keep avoiding answering the above bolded question. I think the reasons for having a trade ending date in dynasty leagues have been well articulated here by DropKick, Matthias and others - if you really don't "get it" by this point, there is nothing more I can add to the points already raised in this discussion.

I haven't ignored the question. I've said "just because the NFL does it" is not sufficient justification to carry it over. You want to talk about the REASONS the NFL does it, them I'm game, but that's what I've been doing. Tell me, what are the reasons the NFL has a trade deadline? And which of those reasons have I not addressed?The NFL is a very different entity than a fantasy league. The NFL is a multibillion dollar industry, and as I've said a half dozen times already, money is extremely corrosive to integrity, so sometimes you need to adopt bad or inefficient or suboptimal rules to protect against underhanded dealings. My fantasy league is not a multibillion dollar industry, so that is less of a concern. The NFL's primary goal is not for its 32 owners to have loads of fun, it's to maximize profit. My fantasy league doesn't turn a profit- its sole reason for existence is for the owners to have fun, so there's a much stronger case for allowing rules that are fun (trading is fun!) but not necessarily profit-maximizing (trading is an inefficient use of monetary resources, because you're paying full salary for a player that is not fully integrated in your scheme). In the NFL, players know intimate details about their teams which could give opposing teams an advantage, so there are ulterior considerations for limiting player movement. In my fantasy league, if I trade for Tony Gonzalez, he can't tell me that his owner is secretly planning on starting Matt Schaub to block my Andre Johnson. Secrecy is literally a non-issue. You talk about buying a championship as being a bad thing, but in the NFL, it's possible to literally try to buy a championship with real, actual money (as opposed to football assets) by hiring the best coaching staff, the best scouting department, giving huge signing bonuses and tolerating lots of dead money, even trading players straight up for cash considerations (as Denver and TB did with Plummer), or buying coaches from opposing teams out of contention after the playoffs start (as NE did with McDaniels). So by your "it's good enough for the NFL" reasoning, we should have no problem with people buying championships.

I agree that you have clearly laid out your arguments for a trade deadline. It's not that I don't "get it", it's that I find them thoroughly and completely unpersuasive. Just like how if I said "clearly you don't understand my arguments", you'd respond that you understood them just fine, you just found them unpersuasive. And that's fine- we don't have to persuade each other. Let's just not pretend that our arguments are slam dunks, our cases are unassailable, and anyone who disagrees must just be too dense to understand.

For what it's worth, from personal experience (20 combined years worth of experience in dynasty leagues with no deadlines), removing the deadline really doesn't lead to the apocalypse some here seem to think it might. Believe it or not, teams don't trade their kidneys on the black market for championships. In fact, in those 20 combined seasons, I've seen perhaps 10 trades during the fantasy playoffs. In roughly half of them, BOTH participants were either still alive, or had already been eliminated from contention. In most of the others, the trade was designed to overcome an injury. In only one trade did one team try to "buy" a championship by trading future assets for a present one without first being prompted by injury. In 2009, someone traded a rookie 2nd for Ricky Williams. Williams went for 96 yards and zero TDs in weeks 15 and 16 combined. Oh, the humanity!

 

[tdmills]

One of the issues that keeps popping up in this discussion is the fear of owners 'bailing' on the league for various reasons. My league has dealt with this by implementing rules that keep owners interested year round. One of these rules is our lack of a trading deadline.One of the features of dynasty leagues is the ability for a poor team to sell aging players for future prospects or picks. There is no point in a season where those aging players have more value than around playoff time. To take away the ability to trade away one of these players for maximum value is to reduce the ability for a non-playoff team to improve itself for the long term.We removed our trading deadline four years ago and haven't looked back.Dynasty leagues aren't for everyone, but for those who really want the full experience might want to try no trade deadline.

DING DING DING

 

[tdmills]

Some of you are trying awfully hard to convince others to not have a trade deadline. The arguments you are using for your side are not very convincing and/or open the door for more issues had there been a trade deadline in place.

To each their own. The sword cuts both ways though. If you enjoy not having a trade deadline, go for it. But, that opens the door to worse things happening long term than the flip side. So, have fun fleecing an owner or two this year or next year and then leaving the league after you get your money. Yeah, sell your team this year to win this year and then leave the league. Awesome!

Why would a team leave the league after winning a championship?Every league i've ever played in, have rules instituted for owners trading future draft picks to pay 50% of the next season. Even if the owner leaves that was attempting to make a run...the league has 50% of the money to find a new owner. Makes the whole situation easier. Not complicated.

 

[tdmills]

The issue is not really about being above-the-board, it is a matter of fairness and the idea of buying a championship at the last minute rather than planning ahead with your roster before the trade deadline (that "strategy" thing) which seems again to touch on the point that Dropkick raised which the "no trade deadline" people have never directly responded to (outside of answering the question with a question):

Yes, there is a "magic" timeline as there is in the NFL and other sports. We don't need posts telling us how fantasy differs from the NFL. How about asking yourself "why does the NFL have a trade deadline"? Why do sports at the professional and amateur level have rules about a players play-off eligibility? In MLB, you have to be on the roster as of August 31st. Perhaps they want a "true" champion rather than a team of ringers.

You keep using the word "buying". That's apt- "buying" makes it explicit that you are incurring a cost. To increase your chance of winning a championship this year, the cost you pay is decreasing your chances of winning a championship next year. Teams have limited assets, and if they want to sacrifice future assets to secure present assets, I'm 100% okay with that. Again, the key words here are "buy" and "sacrifice". And none of this guarantees a championship- it very marginally increases chances of winning, and very marginally decreases chances of winning in the future.. I don't get why it's okay to buy a championship in week 13, but not week 15.

And you and the other "no trade deadline" supporters keep avoiding an answer to the above bolded question.

Actually it's been covered numerous times.

If it is such a great idea, why doesn't the NFL do it? After all (to use your words) it would help the rebuilding teams because the contenders are desperate.

You're really comparing the NFL and all it's complexities to Fantasy Football leagues? Billions of dollars vs hundreds of dollars. Owners/GMs/Agents/Players/Coaches vs FF owners. Player contracts vs FF team ownership. Players blending into a team due to scheme/character/intelligence/chemistry vs FF pointsTrades don't happen in the NFL for several reasons outside of a deadline.

 

[squistion]

The NFL is a very different entity than a fantasy league. The NFL is a multibillion dollar industry, and as I've said a half dozen times already, money is extremely corrosive to integrity, so sometimes you need to adopt bad or inefficient or suboptimal rules to protect against underhanded dealings. My fantasy league is not a multibillion dollar industry, so that is less of a concern. The NFL's primary goal is not for its 32 owners to have loads of fun, it's to maximize profit. My fantasy league doesn't turn a profit- its sole reason for existence is for the owners to have fun, so there's a much stronger case for allowing rules that are fun (trading is fun!) but not necessarily profit-maximizing (trading is an inefficient use of monetary resources, because you're paying full salary for a player that is not fully integrated in your scheme).

Money is also corrosive to the the integrity of dynasty leagues but that is not applicable to you since you play exclusively in free leagues, right? Collusion between owners will only buy one of them bragging rights in your leagues, but in my leagues two teams could agree to rent a player during the playoffs (to be traded back the following summer in a trade ostensibly for value) and split a $500 jackpot. So, of course, you league's sole existance is just to have fun, while mine is win cold hard cash and secondarily have fun (I wouldn't play in a free league since the joy of competition with no reward is not worth the time expenditure).

 

[Tornacl]

The issue is not really about being above-the-board, it is a matter of fairness and the idea of buying a championship at the last minute rather than planning ahead with your roster before the trade deadline (that "strategy" thing) which seems again to touch on the point that Dropkick raised which the "no trade deadline" people have never directly responded to (outside of answering the question with a question):

Yes, there is a "magic" timeline as there is in the NFL and other sports. We don't need posts telling us how fantasy differs from the NFL. How about asking yourself "why does the NFL have a trade deadline"? Why do sports at the professional and amateur level have rules about a players play-off eligibility? In MLB, you have to be on the roster as of August 31st. Perhaps they want a "true" champion rather than a team of ringers.

You keep using the word "buying". That's apt- "buying" makes it explicit that you are incurring a cost. To increase your chance of winning a championship this year, the cost you pay is decreasing your chances of winning a championship next year. Teams have limited assets, and if they want to sacrifice future assets to secure present assets, I'm 100% okay with that. Again, the key words here are "buy" and "sacrifice". And none of this guarantees a championship- it very marginally increases chances of winning, and very marginally decreases chances of winning in the future.. I don't get why it's okay to buy a championship in week 13, but not week 15.

And you and the other "no trade deadline" supporters keep avoiding an answer to the above bolded question. I think the reasons for having a trade ending date in dynasty leagues have been well articulated here by DropKick, Matthias and others - if you really don't "get it" by this point, there is nothing more I can add to the points already raised in this discussion.

You're all a bunch of sheep anyway.

 

[tdmills]

The NFL is a very different entity than a fantasy league. The NFL is a multibillion dollar industry, and as I've said a half dozen times already, money is extremely corrosive to integrity, so sometimes you need to adopt bad or inefficient or suboptimal rules to protect against underhanded dealings. My fantasy league is not a multibillion dollar industry, so that is less of a concern. The NFL's primary goal is not for its 32 owners to have loads of fun, it's to maximize profit. My fantasy league doesn't turn a profit- its sole reason for existence is for the owners to have fun, so there's a much stronger case for allowing rules that are fun (trading is fun!) but not necessarily profit-maximizing (trading is an inefficient use of monetary resources, because you're paying full salary for a player that is not fully integrated in your scheme).

Money is also corrosive to the the integrity of dynasty leagues but that is not applicable to you since you play exclusively in free leagues, right? Collusion between owners will only buy one of them bragging rights in your leagues, but in my leagues two teams could agree to rent a player during the playoffs (to be traded back the following summer in a trade ostensibly for value) and split a $500 jackpot. So, of course, you league's sole existance is just to have fun, while mine is win cold hard cash and secondarily have fun (I wouldn't play in a free league since the joy of competition with no reward is not worth the time expenditure).

What does this have to do with a deadline? Can't owners do this same thing in week 13 vs week 15? The answer to this riddle is yes.

 

[Tornacl]

Some of you are trying awfully hard to convince others to not have a trade deadline. The arguments you are using for your side are not very convincing and/or open the door for more issues had there been a trade deadline in place.To each their own. The sword cuts both ways though. If you enjoy not having a trade deadline, go for it. But, that opens the door to worse things happening long term than the flip side. So, have fun fleecing an owner or two this year or next year and then leaving the league after you get your money. Yeah, sell your team this year to win this year and then leave the league. Awesome!

I've never left a dynasty league that I've joined, and currently remain in four of them. Just because you would do that (or the players you play with) doesn't mean that is what everyone does.I wouldn't expect you to actually understand the points that were made, besides nothing can compete with the "this is what everyone does" argument.

 

[squistion]

The issue is not really about being above-the-board, it is a matter of fairness and the idea of buying a championship at the last minute rather than planning ahead with your roster before the trade deadline (that "strategy" thing) which seems again to touch on the point that Dropkick raised which the "no trade deadline" people have never directly responded to (outside of answering the question with a question):

Yes, there is a "magic" timeline as there is in the NFL and other sports. We don't need posts telling us how fantasy differs from the NFL. How about asking yourself "why does the NFL have a trade deadline"? Why do sports at the professional and amateur level have rules about a players play-off eligibility? In MLB, you have to be on the roster as of August 31st. Perhaps they want a "true" champion rather than a team of ringers.

You keep using the word "buying". That's apt- "buying" makes it explicit that you are incurring a cost. To increase your chance of winning a championship this year, the cost you pay is decreasing your chances of winning a championship next year. Teams have limited assets, and if they want to sacrifice future assets to secure present assets, I'm 100% okay with that. Again, the key words here are "buy" and "sacrifice". And none of this guarantees a championship- it very marginally increases chances of winning, and very marginally decreases chances of winning in the future.. I don't get why it's okay to buy a championship in week 13, but not week 15.

And you and the other "no trade deadline" supporters keep avoiding an answer to the above bolded question.

Actually it's been covered numerous times.

If it is such a great idea, why doesn't the NFL do it? After all (to use your words) it would help the rebuilding teams because the contenders are desperate.

You're really comparing the NFL and all it's complexities to Fantasy Football leagues? Billions of dollars vs hundreds of dollars. Owners/GMs/Agents/Players/Coaches vs FF owners. Player contracts vs FF team ownership. Players blending into a team due to scheme/character/intelligence/chemistry vs FF pointsTrades don't happen in the NFL for several reasons outside of a deadline.

But still not answered IMO from what you previously posted and, yes, I am comparing fantasy football to the NFL because I feel it does go to principles of fairness and the idea of not using strategy to prepare your roster before the playoff, but instead renting or buying a mercenary right before a fantasy championship or a Super Bowl. You think that is fair, fine. I don't. You can play in your no trade deadline leagues and I will play in mine and we agree to disagree and both be happy.

 

[tdmills]

The issue is not really about being above-the-board, it is a matter of fairness and the idea of buying a championship at the last minute rather than planning ahead with your roster before the trade deadline (that "strategy" thing) which seems again to touch on the point that Dropkick raised which the "no trade deadline" people have never directly responded to (outside of answering the question with a question):

Yes, there is a "magic" timeline as there is in the NFL and other sports. We don't need posts telling us how fantasy differs from the NFL. How about asking yourself "why does the NFL have a trade deadline"? Why do sports at the professional and amateur level have rules about a players play-off eligibility? In MLB, you have to be on the roster as of August 31st. Perhaps they want a "true" champion rather than a team of ringers.

You keep using the word "buying". That's apt- "buying" makes it explicit that you are incurring a cost. To increase your chance of winning a championship this year, the cost you pay is decreasing your chances of winning a championship next year. Teams have limited assets, and if they want to sacrifice future assets to secure present assets, I'm 100% okay with that. Again, the key words here are "buy" and "sacrifice". And none of this guarantees a championship- it very marginally increases chances of winning, and very marginally decreases chances of winning in the future.. I don't get why it's okay to buy a championship in week 13, but not week 15.

And you and the other "no trade deadline" supporters keep avoiding an answer to the above bolded question.

Actually it's been covered numerous times.

If it is such a great idea, why doesn't the NFL do it? After all (to use your words) it would help the rebuilding teams because the contenders are desperate.

You're really comparing the NFL and all it's complexities to Fantasy Football leagues? Billions of dollars vs hundreds of dollars. Owners/GMs/Agents/Players/Coaches vs FF owners. Player contracts vs FF team ownership. Players blending into a team due to scheme/character/intelligence/chemistry vs FF pointsTrades don't happen in the NFL for several reasons outside of a deadline.

But still not answered IMO from what you previously posted and, yes, I am comparing fantasy football to the NFL because I feel it does go to principles of fairness and the idea of not using strategy to prepare your roster before the playoff, but instead renting or buying a mercenary right before a fantasy championship or a Super Bowl. You think that is fair, fine. I don't. You can play in your no trade deadline leagues and I will play in mine and we agree to disagree and both be happy.

Your comparing oranges to apples, but think they're the same because they're in the same category...fruit. You can stop debating if you wish(it's your choice) but you haven't convinced me why a trade deadline should be in place.

 

[Mister CIA]

The NFL is a very different entity than a fantasy league. The NFL is a multibillion dollar industry, and as I've said a half dozen times already, money is extremely corrosive to integrity, so sometimes you need to adopt bad or inefficient or suboptimal rules to protect against underhanded dealings. My fantasy league is not a multibillion dollar industry, so that is less of a concern. The NFL's primary goal is not for its 32 owners to have loads of fun, it's to maximize profit. My fantasy league doesn't turn a profit- its sole reason for existence is for the owners to have fun, so there's a much stronger case for allowing rules that are fun (trading is fun!) but not necessarily profit-maximizing (trading is an inefficient use of monetary resources, because you're paying full salary for a player that is not fully integrated in your scheme).

...It was a Jump to Collusions mat. You see it would be this mat, that you would put on the floor, and would have different collusions written on it ... that you could jump to.

 

[squistion]

The NFL is a very different entity than a fantasy league. The NFL is a multibillion dollar industry, and as I've said a half dozen times already, money is extremely corrosive to integrity, so sometimes you need to adopt bad or inefficient or suboptimal rules to protect against underhanded dealings. My fantasy league is not a multibillion dollar industry, so that is less of a concern. The NFL's primary goal is not for its 32 owners to have loads of fun, it's to maximize profit. My fantasy league doesn't turn a profit- its sole reason for existence is for the owners to have fun, so there's a much stronger case for allowing rules that are fun (trading is fun!) but not necessarily profit-maximizing (trading is an inefficient use of monetary resources, because you're paying full salary for a player that is not fully integrated in your scheme).

Money is also corrosive to the the integrity of dynasty leagues but that is not applicable to you since you play exclusively in free leagues, right? Collusion between owners will only buy one of them bragging rights in your leagues, but in my leagues two teams could agree to rent a player during the playoffs (to be traded back the following summer in a trade ostensibly for value) and split a $500 jackpot. So, of course, you league's sole existance is just to have fun, while mine is win cold hard cash and secondarily have fun (I wouldn't play in a free league since the joy of competition with no reward is not worth the time expenditure).

What does this have to do with a deadline? Can't owners do this same thing in week 13 vs week 15? The answer to this riddle is yes.

Asked and answered several times, DropKick came up with some good points if you want to reread his responses. Also Matthias stated it quite well when he said:

That said, the reason you have a trade deadline is to temper trades. The closer you get to the fantasy championship, the more certainty there is in outcomes. At the extreme example, someone would be very willing to do an unbalanced trade an hour before the championship starts because they know it will affect the outcome and their chance at winning. And on the other side, their trading partner will be more than happy to give up value-now to get value-later since they're completely eliminated from contention. And once you get to that, then the league becomes less about who drafts and prepares better and who is more willing to sell out future seasons to win this season. You don't need guys who are going to bail to make that happen. You just need someone who decides that they're fine with taking their lumps for 2 rebuilding years to win this year. And for me, that's not what fantasy sports are about. I'd rather play in leagues that everyone goes into the year playing to win for that year.

 

[voiceofunreason]

dynasty leagues should have no trades during playoffs only, IMO

Why? What does it hurt? As another member suggested, it helps the rebuilding teams because the contenders are desperate.

For sure, they don't have trade deadlines in the real NFL. No reason for it.

 

[squistion]

The issue is not really about being above-the-board, it is a matter of fairness and the idea of buying a championship at the last minute rather than planning ahead with your roster before the trade deadline (that "strategy" thing) which seems again to touch on the point that Dropkick raised which the "no trade deadline" people have never directly responded to (outside of answering the question with a question):

Yes, there is a "magic" timeline as there is in the NFL and other sports. We don't need posts telling us how fantasy differs from the NFL. How about asking yourself "why does the NFL have a trade deadline"? Why do sports at the professional and amateur level have rules about a players play-off eligibility? In MLB, you have to be on the roster as of August 31st. Perhaps they want a "true" champion rather than a team of ringers.

You keep using the word "buying". That's apt- "buying" makes it explicit that you are incurring a cost. To increase your chance of winning a championship this year, the cost you pay is decreasing your chances of winning a championship next year. Teams have limited assets, and if they want to sacrifice future assets to secure present assets, I'm 100% okay with that. Again, the key words here are "buy" and "sacrifice". And none of this guarantees a championship- it very marginally increases chances of winning, and very marginally decreases chances of winning in the future.. I don't get why it's okay to buy a championship in week 13, but not week 15.

And you and the other "no trade deadline" supporters keep avoiding an answer to the above bolded question. I think the reasons for having a trade ending date in dynasty leagues have been well articulated here by DropKick, Matthias and others - if you really don't "get it" by this point, there is nothing more I can add to the points already raised in this discussion.

You're all a bunch of sheep anyway.

Baaaaaah!

 

[Tornacl]

Whole lotta misconception running wild in this thread. No trade deadline DNE owner getting fleeced. If I'm a playoff contender needing a boost down the stretch, I don't give away the crown jewels; instead I simply overbuy. For example, this past week I traded LeSean McCoy and my second rounder for Jamaal Charles. I'm in the playoffs with a decent chance of winning the league Super Bowl, while things are looking up for 2-8 team in 2013.If a trade benefits both teams and you have a problem with it, then you need to look in the mirror.

The problem is that many of the most vocal supporters of the trade deadline by their own admission haven't even played in a dynasty league - so they don't have any real experience to know how things really tend to work.Most of the trades that I've seen are minor deals where a bottom team picks up an emerging short-term waiver wire player, and they turn around and sell it for injured player or draft pick. They aren't these blockbuster deals that everyone seems to think are going to happen. Usually they are just trades that are mutually beneficial (in the short term for one team, and in the long term for the other) which is how dynasty trades often work.

 

[Tornacl]

The issue is not really about being above-the-board, it is a matter of fairness and the idea of buying a championship at the last minute rather than planning ahead with your roster before the trade deadline (that "strategy" thing) which seems again to touch on the point that Dropkick raised which the "no trade deadline" people have never directly responded to (outside of answering the question with a question):

Yes, there is a "magic" timeline as there is in the NFL and other sports. We don't need posts telling us how fantasy differs from the NFL. How about asking yourself "why does the NFL have a trade deadline"? Why do sports at the professional and amateur level have rules about a players play-off eligibility? In MLB, you have to be on the roster as of August 31st. Perhaps they want a "true" champion rather than a team of ringers.

You keep using the word "buying". That's apt- "buying" makes it explicit that you are incurring a cost. To increase your chance of winning a championship this year, the cost you pay is decreasing your chances of winning a championship next year. Teams have limited assets, and if they want to sacrifice future assets to secure present assets, I'm 100% okay with that. Again, the key words here are "buy" and "sacrifice". And none of this guarantees a championship- it very marginally increases chances of winning, and very marginally decreases chances of winning in the future.. I don't get why it's okay to buy a championship in week 13, but not week 15.

And you and the other "no trade deadline" supporters keep avoiding an answer to the above bolded question. I think the reasons for having a trade ending date in dynasty leagues have been well articulated here by DropKick, Matthias and others - if you really don't "get it" by this point, there is nothing more I can add to the points already raised in this discussion.

You're all a bunch of sheep anyway.

Baaaaaah!

I KNEW it!

 

[Mario Kart]

Some of you are trying awfully hard to convince others to not have a trade deadline. The arguments you are using for your side are not very convincing and/or open the door for more issues had there been a trade deadline in place.To each their own. The sword cuts both ways though. If you enjoy not having a trade deadline, go for it. But, that opens the door to worse things happening long term than the flip side. So, have fun fleecing an owner or two this year or next year and then leaving the league after you get your money. Yeah, sell your team this year to win this year and then leave the league. Awesome!

I've never left a dynasty league that I've joined, and currently remain in four of them. Just because you would do that (or the players you play with) doesn't mean that is what everyone does.I wouldn't expect you to actually understand the points that were made, besides nothing can compete with the "this is what everyone does" argument.

WTH?

 

[squistion]

Whole lotta misconception running wild in this thread. No trade deadline DNE owner getting fleeced. If I'm a playoff contender needing a boost down the stretch, I don't give away the crown jewels; instead I simply overbuy. For example, this past week I traded LeSean McCoy and my second rounder for Jamaal Charles. I'm in the playoffs with a decent chance of winning the league Super Bowl, while things are looking up for 2-8 team in 2013.

If a trade benefits both teams and you have a problem with it, then you need to look in the mirror.

The problem is that many of the most vocal supporters of the trade deadline by their own admission haven't even played in a dynasty league - so they don't have any real experience to know how things really tend to work.

Most of the trades that I've seen are minor deals where a bottom team picks up an emerging short-term waiver wire player, and they turn around and sell it for injured player or draft pick. They aren't these blockbuster deals that everyone seems to think are going to happen. Usually they are just trades that are mutually beneficial (in the short term for one team, and in the long term for the other) which is how dynasty trades often work.

Many?Since when is one person many? And he played in a 6-keeper, which I realize you don't count as valid, but as I noted earlier, my 6-keeper has a trading deadline based on the same rationale as dynasty leagues - so it is somewhat analogous.

And I have been in dynasty leagues since 2003 and currently play in 5 (plus 2 keepers) so I do have experience as to how things really work and saw one of my leagues ultimately fold as a result of not having a trade deadline (which is why I avoid those leagues like the plague).

 

[tdmills]

The NFL is a very different entity than a fantasy league. The NFL is a multibillion dollar industry, and as I've said a half dozen times already, money is extremely corrosive to integrity, so sometimes you need to adopt bad or inefficient or suboptimal rules to protect against underhanded dealings. My fantasy league is not a multibillion dollar industry, so that is less of a concern. The NFL's primary goal is not for its 32 owners to have loads of fun, it's to maximize profit. My fantasy league doesn't turn a profit- its sole reason for existence is for the owners to have fun, so there's a much stronger case for allowing rules that are fun (trading is fun!) but not necessarily profit-maximizing (trading is an inefficient use of monetary resources, because you're paying full salary for a player that is not fully integrated in your scheme).

Money is also corrosive to the the integrity of dynasty leagues but that is not applicable to you since you play exclusively in free leagues, right? Collusion between owners will only buy one of them bragging rights in your leagues, but in my leagues two teams could agree to rent a player during the playoffs (to be traded back the following summer in a trade ostensibly for value) and split a $500 jackpot. So, of course, you league's sole existance is just to have fun, while mine is win cold hard cash and secondarily have fun (I wouldn't play in a free league since the joy of competition with no reward is not worth the time expenditure).

What does this have to do with a deadline? Can't owners do this same thing in week 13 vs week 15? The answer to this riddle is yes.

Asked and answered several times, DropKick came up with some good points if you want to reread his responses. Also Matthias stated it quite well when he said:

That said, the reason you have a trade deadline is to temper trades. The closer you get to the fantasy championship, the more certainty there is in outcomes. At the extreme example, someone would be very willing to do an unbalanced trade an hour before the championship starts because they know it will affect the outcome and their chance at winning. And on the other side, their trading partner will be more than happy to give up value-now to get value-later since they're completely eliminated from contention. And once you get to that, then the league becomes less about who drafts and prepares better and who is more willing to sell out future seasons to win this season. You don't need guys who are going to bail to make that happen. You just need someone who decides that they're fine with taking their lumps for 2 rebuilding years to win this year. And for me, that's not what fantasy sports are about. I'd rather play in leagues that everyone goes into the year playing to win for that year.

I thought trading was one of the most enjoyable parts of FF. Trading for a player to put you over the top guarantees NOTHING, but requires sacrifice.Why temper trades? One of the best parts of dynasty.

More certainty in the outcomes...DOESN'T HAPPEN. Injuries, down games from great players, etc happen.

Here is a personal story, both discount this "certainty".

In 2008 I played in a dynasty startup. My top pick Tom Brady had his season cut short in week 1(ACL). My second round pick Rashard Mendenhall was lost for the season early(broken shoulder). I limped into the playoffs on a tie-breaker. I had two players get hot: Antonio Bryant and Pierre Thomas. They had me upset three teams I had no business beating all the way to a championship. No rules in place to protect those stud teams would have any helped make any "certainty".

You guys may think you're protecting something, instead your hindering your league. Owners leave leagues due to not having fun more than not winning. They will stay around longer with a worse team if it has trading/activity. By handcuffing that potential it's harder to turn around a team...hence more owners leaving.

 

[Mister CIA]

Whole lotta misconception running wild in this thread. No trade deadline DNE owner getting fleeced. If I'm a playoff contender needing a boost down the stretch, I don't give away the crown jewels; instead I simply overbuy. For example, this past week I traded LeSean McCoy and my second rounder for Jamaal Charles. I'm in the playoffs with a decent chance of winning the league Super Bowl, while things are looking up for 2-8 team in 2013.

If a trade benefits both teams and you have a problem with it, then you need to look in the mirror.

The problem is that many of the most vocal supporters of the trade deadline by their own admission haven't even played in a dynasty league - so they don't have any real experience to know how things really tend to work.

Most of the trades that I've seen are minor deals where a bottom team picks up an emerging short-term waiver wire player, and they turn around and sell it for injured player or draft pick. They aren't these blockbuster deals that everyone seems to think are going to happen. Usually they are just trades that are mutually beneficial (in the short term for one team, and in the long term for the other) which is how dynasty trades often work.

Many?Since when is one person many? And he played in a 6-keeper, which I realize you don't count as valid, but as I noted earlier, my 6-keeper has a trading deadline based on the same rationale as dynasty leagues - so it is somewhat analogous.

And I have been in dynasty leagues since 2003 and currently play in 5 (plus 2 keepers) so I do have experience as to how things really work and saw one of my leagues ultimately fold as a result of not having a trade deadline (which is why I avoid those leagues like the plague).

What trade(s) brought about your league's demise?

 

[Guest]

More certainty in the outcomes...DOESN'T HAPPEN. Injuries, down games from great players, etc happen.

Here is a personal story, both discount this "certainty".

In 2008 I played in a dynasty startup. My top pick Tom Brady had his season cut short in week 1(ACL). My second round pick Rashard Mendenhall was lost for the season early(broken shoulder). I limped into the playoffs on a tie-breaker. I had two players get hot: Antonio Bryant and Pierre Thomas. They had me upset three teams I had no business beating all the way to a championship. No rules in place to protect those stud teams would have any helped make any "certainty".

You guys may think you're protecting something, instead your hindering your league. Owners leave leagues due to not having fun more than not winning. They will stay around longer with a worse team if it has trading/activity. By handcuffing that potential it's harder to turn around a team...hence more owners leaving.

Your little, "I had a magical football team that could" story doesn't change anything. And it certainly didn't teach anything. More certainty isn't the same thing as being certain. Say I offered you game where you had to flip a coin 10 teams and if every one came up heads, I'd pay you $1,000. The value to you to play that game would be roughly $1. You have a 1-in-1,024 chance with a $1,000 reward. Now what if I spotted you the first 9 flips? Now it's worth a whole lot more. It's no guarantee that you'll win but your odds (and the value of the game) look a whole lot better than they did before. If you don't understand how that example correlates with how people should be willing to make trades the closer they get to the championship, then sit down and think for a while.And my friends love my leagues, thanks. I run 1 for football and run 1 for baseball and everyone who is in them says they're the best-run ones they've ever done. So don't worry about little old me and my owners.

 

[squistion]

Whole lotta misconception running wild in this thread. No trade deadline DNE owner getting fleeced. If I'm a playoff contender needing a boost down the stretch, I don't give away the crown jewels; instead I simply overbuy. For example, this past week I traded LeSean McCoy and my second rounder for Jamaal Charles. I'm in the playoffs with a decent chance of winning the league Super Bowl, while things are looking up for 2-8 team in 2013.

If a trade benefits both teams and you have a problem with it, then you need to look in the mirror.

The problem is that many of the most vocal supporters of the trade deadline by their own admission haven't even played in a dynasty league - so they don't have any real experience to know how things really tend to work.

Most of the trades that I've seen are minor deals where a bottom team picks up an emerging short-term waiver wire player, and they turn around and sell it for injured player or draft pick. They aren't these blockbuster deals that everyone seems to think are going to happen. Usually they are just trades that are mutually beneficial (in the short term for one team, and in the long term for the other) which is how dynasty trades often work.

Many?Since when is one person many? And he played in a 6-keeper, which I realize you don't count as valid, but as I noted earlier, my 6-keeper has a trading deadline based on the same rationale as dynasty leagues - so it is somewhat analogous.

And I have been in dynasty leagues since 2003 and currently play in 5 (plus 2 keepers) so I do have experience as to how things really work and saw one of my leagues ultimately fold as a result of not having a trade deadline (which is why I avoid those leagues like the plague).

What trade(s) brought about your league's demise?

A very long story, but a trade made during the playoffs (perhaps collusion since the team initiating the trade quit the league the next year) turned one of the already top teams into an unbeatable powerhouse who then won 3 consecutive league championships (largely as a result of the trade). Because it occured during the playoffs and most owners were out of playoffs, they didn't really care, and despite my objections the trade stood because it was allowed under the rules. After the 3rd playoff win of the lucky trade recipient of the roster dump, a majority of the league got tired of playing for 2nd place, and quit, with the league folding. Perhaps an extreme and unusual outcome, but I saw it happen.

 

[Tornacl]

Whole lotta misconception running wild in this thread. No trade deadline DNE owner getting fleeced. If I'm a playoff contender needing a boost down the stretch, I don't give away the crown jewels; instead I simply overbuy. For example, this past week I traded LeSean McCoy and my second rounder for Jamaal Charles. I'm in the playoffs with a decent chance of winning the league Super Bowl, while things are looking up for 2-8 team in 2013.

If a trade benefits both teams and you have a problem with it, then you need to look in the mirror.

The problem is that many of the most vocal supporters of the trade deadline by their own admission haven't even played in a dynasty league - so they don't have any real experience to know how things really tend to work.

Most of the trades that I've seen are minor deals where a bottom team picks up an emerging short-term waiver wire player, and they turn around and sell it for injured player or draft pick. They aren't these blockbuster deals that everyone seems to think are going to happen. Usually they are just trades that are mutually beneficial (in the short term for one team, and in the long term for the other) which is how dynasty trades often work.

Many?Since when is one person many? And he played in a 6-keeper, which I realize you don't count as valid, but as I noted earlier, my 6-keeper has a trading deadline based on the same rationale as dynasty leagues - so it is somewhat analogous.

And I have been in dynasty leagues since 2003 and currently play in 5 (plus 2 keepers) so I do have experience as to how things really work and saw one of my leagues ultimately fold as a result of not having a trade deadline (which is why I avoid those leagues like the plague).

What trade(s) brought about your league's demise?

A very long story, but a trade made during the playoffs (perhaps collusion since the team initiating the trade quit the league the next year) turned one of the already top teams into an unbeatable powerhouse who then won 3 consecutive league championships (largely as a result of the trade). Because it occured during the playoffs and most owners were out of playoffs, they didn't really care, and despite my objections the trade stood because it was allowed under the rules. After the 3rd playoff win of the lucky trade recipient of the roster dump, a majority of the league got tired of playing for 2nd place, and quit, with the league folding. Perhaps an extreme and unusual outcome, but I saw it happen.

Would it have made ANY difference if the same trade would have been done in say week 12, just before a trade deadline? It sounds like your league was a victim of a bad trade and bad owners, not that it lacked a trade deadline. Actual collusion is bad for a league whether it happens in week 2 or the playoffs.

 

[Mister CIA]

Whole lotta misconception running wild in this thread. No trade deadline DNE owner getting fleeced. If I'm a playoff contender needing a boost down the stretch, I don't give away the crown jewels; instead I simply overbuy. For example, this past week I traded LeSean McCoy and my second rounder for Jamaal Charles. I'm in the playoffs with a decent chance of winning the league Super Bowl, while things are looking up for 2-8 team in 2013.

If a trade benefits both teams and you have a problem with it, then you need to look in the mirror.

The problem is that many of the most vocal supporters of the trade deadline by their own admission haven't even played in a dynasty league - so they don't have any real experience to know how things really tend to work.

Most of the trades that I've seen are minor deals where a bottom team picks up an emerging short-term waiver wire player, and they turn around and sell it for injured player or draft pick. They aren't these blockbuster deals that everyone seems to think are going to happen. Usually they are just trades that are mutually beneficial (in the short term for one team, and in the long term for the other) which is how dynasty trades often work.

Many?Since when is one person many? And he played in a 6-keeper, which I realize you don't count as valid, but as I noted earlier, my 6-keeper has a trading deadline based on the same rationale as dynasty leagues - so it is somewhat analogous.

And I have been in dynasty leagues since 2003 and currently play in 5 (plus 2 keepers) so I do have experience as to how things really work and saw one of my leagues ultimately fold as a result of not having a trade deadline (which is why I avoid those leagues like the plague).

What trade(s) brought about your league's demise?

A very long story, but a trade made during the playoffs (perhaps collusion since the team initiating the trade quit the league the next year) turned one of the already top teams into an unbeatable powerhouse who then won 3 consecutive league championships (largely as a result of the trade). Because it occured during the playoffs and most owners were out of playoffs, they didn't really care, and despite my objections the trade stood because it was allowed under the rules. After the 3rd playoff win of the lucky trade recipient of the roster dump, a majority of the league got tired of playing for 2nd place, and quit, with the league folding. Perhaps an extreme and unusual outcome, but I saw it happen.

Care to tell us the details of the trade?

 

[squistion]

Whole lotta misconception running wild in this thread. No trade deadline DNE owner getting fleeced. If I'm a playoff contender needing a boost down the stretch, I don't give away the crown jewels; instead I simply overbuy. For example, this past week I traded LeSean McCoy and my second rounder for Jamaal Charles. I'm in the playoffs with a decent chance of winning the league Super Bowl, while things are looking up for 2-8 team in 2013.

If a trade benefits both teams and you have a problem with it, then you need to look in the mirror.

The problem is that many of the most vocal supporters of the trade deadline by their own admission haven't even played in a dynasty league - so they don't have any real experience to know how things really tend to work.

Most of the trades that I've seen are minor deals where a bottom team picks up an emerging short-term waiver wire player, and they turn around and sell it for injured player or draft pick. They aren't these blockbuster deals that everyone seems to think are going to happen. Usually they are just trades that are mutually beneficial (in the short term for one team, and in the long term for the other) which is how dynasty trades often work.

Many?Since when is one person many? And he played in a 6-keeper, which I realize you don't count as valid, but as I noted earlier, my 6-keeper has a trading deadline based on the same rationale as dynasty leagues - so it is somewhat analogous.

And I have been in dynasty leagues since 2003 and currently play in 5 (plus 2 keepers) so I do have experience as to how things really work and saw one of my leagues ultimately fold as a result of not having a trade deadline (which is why I avoid those leagues like the plague).

What trade(s) brought about your league's demise?

A very long story, but a trade made during the playoffs (perhaps collusion since the team initiating the trade quit the league the next year) turned one of the already top teams into an unbeatable powerhouse who then won 3 consecutive league championships (largely as a result of the trade). Because it occured during the playoffs and most owners were out of playoffs, they didn't really care, and despite my objections the trade stood because it was allowed under the rules. After the 3rd playoff win of the lucky trade recipient of the roster dump, a majority of the league got tired of playing for 2nd place, and quit, with the league folding. Perhaps an extreme and unusual outcome, but I saw it happen.

Would it have made ANY difference if the same trade would have been done in say week 12, just before a trade deadline? It sounds like your league was a victim of a bad trade and bad owners, not that it lacked a trade deadline. Actual collusion is bad for a league whether it happens in week 2 or the playoffs.

I would like to believe so, because at that point all the owners were still involved in the league and I might have been able to get some sort of league vote, or get something done about this horrible trade, but at that late date when the trade was made, the owners not in the playoffs pretty much thought "so what" that the season was over and were not concerned with the consequences because it did not immediately effect them. The lateness of the trade did not leave enough time for the league to address the issue - it could be the outcome would have been the same if done in Week 12, but I doubt it.

 

[DropKick]

I can tell what my intent was. Tdmills figured it out, too, so it couldn't have been that opaque. Sorry for stripping your post of "context", but this entire thread is context, and I didn't feel like continuing to nest quotes 12 deep when anyone who wanted to read the original context could just read any of the 12 posts in the string you had been responding to. Do you feel like I unfairly characterized any of your points, or committed any other offenses that would have been ameliorated by the addition of context?

Apparently you had a little trouble understanding my post ("incoherent" was the word you used), so I'll boil it down for you. Let's say you have an amazing team- top 5 QB, two top 10 RBs, three top 20 WRs, and a top 5 TE. Let's say you also have awesome depth at all positions- a second top 10 QB, a top 20 RB, a top 30 WR, and a top 10 TE. Now, let's say your suffer an injury at QB. Through no fault of your own, you no longer have awesome depth at that position, do you? Through no fault of your own, you are now SHALLOW at that position. Without the possibility of trades to rectify this situation, you will continue through the playoffs SHALLOW at that position- not because you didn't have the foresight to prepare, but because you had the misfortune of suffering an injury. If you suffer a second injury at that position, your entire season is sunk, not because you didn't have depth, but because you were unlucky and the trade deadline left you with no recourse.

Let's give another example- let's say that you have two equal teams, neither of which has any depth. Let's say team A suffers and injury and team B does not. Team B now wins, not because it was better or deeper, but because it was luckier and team A was left with no recourse thanks to the trade deadline.

Let's give another example. Let's say that team A and team B are equal in all respects, and that both have great depth at RB and terrible depth at WR. Let's say team A suffers an injury at RB, and team B suffers an injury at WR. Team B gets screwed by luck, because the trade deadline prevents them from trading that RB depth for WR depth.

Again, all of these examples are situations where luck, not superior roster construction, are giving the title to one team over another. Your solution is to just compile quality depth at every position. This is often a pipe dream- few people have the assets to acquire quality depth at every position, and a superior strategy is to have quality depth at one position that can be easily converted to quality depth at another position should a need arise. Trade deadlines end that roster flexibility.

I understand that you and I have completely different dynasty mindsets. You have told me in the past that your philosophy is heavily based on the fact that leagues don't last long, so you gotta get yours while you can before it folds. Based on that mindset, and if you play with other owners with a similar mindset, a fondness for a trade deadline makes sense. I already said as much in my first post in this thread- if you think teams are going to mortgage the future to make a run now and then bail, then yeah, have a trade deadline. If men were angels, no government would be needed. Men are not angels, so if you need to put rules in place because you don't trust your league mates, then go for it. As has been mentioned, though, that's more a problem with your leaguemates than it is a problem with removing trade deadlines.

Then why have rosters at all? Just play Fanduel style and take all the injury/health "luck" out of it.I don't like dynasty leagues generally. I played in one league for 5 or so years that was a Keep-6 and it was terrible. We had Tomlinson, Priest Holmes, Torry Holt, and 3 other top-50 guys. It's too easy to ruin a league with too many keepers.

That said, the reason you have a trade deadline is to temper trades. The closer you get to the fantasy championship, the more certainty there is in outcomes. At the extreme example, someone would be very willing to do an unbalanced trade an hour before the championship starts because they know it will affect the outcome and their chance at winning. And on the other side, their trading partner will be more than happy to give up value-now to get value-later since they're completely eliminated from contention. And once you get to that, then the league becomes less about who drafts and prepares better and who is more willing to sell out future seasons to win this season. You don't need guys who are going to bail to make that happen. You just need someone who decides that they're fine with taking their lumps for 2 rebuilding years to win this year. And for me, that's not what fantasy sports are about. I'd rather play in leagues that everyone goes into the year playing to win for that year.

Considering the number and nature of collusion threads we already see, can you imagine the potential controversy and heart burn with trades during FF playoffs?

He just said that he doesn't even like dynasty leagues, but still I'm sure he's had great experience with them, after all, he once played in a keeper league.

Your reading comprehension is nil. He has the right not to like dynasty leagues but he also recognized the main issues with not having a trade deadline: "the league becomes less about who drafts and prepares better and who is more willing to sell out future seasons to win this season".

Give me a break, whose reading comprehension is nil? He said that he doesn't like dynasty leagues because he once was in a 6-player keeper league - that isn't even a dynasty league! Why should anyone value the opinion of someone who admittedly has ZERO experience relevant to the topic? There is a big difference between keeper leagues and dynasty leagues - something that neither of the two of you appear to understand. Why don't you go back to elementary school and learn to read what he wrote. Until then, shouldn't your mom limit your computer time or something?

Yours... My God! Can't you read?ETA: Incidentally, the poll is a landslide.

 

[Mister CIA]

Whole lotta misconception running wild in this thread. No trade deadline DNE owner getting fleeced. If I'm a playoff contender needing a boost down the stretch, I don't give away the crown jewels; instead I simply overbuy. For example, this past week I traded LeSean McCoy and my second rounder for Jamaal Charles. I'm in the playoffs with a decent chance of winning the league Super Bowl, while things are looking up for 2-8 team in 2013.

If a trade benefits both teams and you have a problem with it, then you need to look in the mirror.

The problem is that many of the most vocal supporters of the trade deadline by their own admission haven't even played in a dynasty league - so they don't have any real experience to know how things really tend to work.

Most of the trades that I've seen are minor deals where a bottom team picks up an emerging short-term waiver wire player, and they turn around and sell it for injured player or draft pick. They aren't these blockbuster deals that everyone seems to think are going to happen. Usually they are just trades that are mutually beneficial (in the short term for one team, and in the long term for the other) which is how dynasty trades often work.

Many?Since when is one person many? And he played in a 6-keeper, which I realize you don't count as valid, but as I noted earlier, my 6-keeper has a trading deadline based on the same rationale as dynasty leagues - so it is somewhat analogous.

And I have been in dynasty leagues since 2003 and currently play in 5 (plus 2 keepers) so I do have experience as to how things really work and saw one of my leagues ultimately fold as a result of not having a trade deadline (which is why I avoid those leagues like the plague).

What trade(s) brought about your league's demise?

A very long story, but a trade made during the playoffs (perhaps collusion since the team initiating the trade quit the league the next year) turned one of the already top teams into an unbeatable powerhouse who then won 3 consecutive league championships (largely as a result of the trade). Because it occured during the playoffs and most owners were out of playoffs, they didn't really care, and despite my objections the trade stood because it was allowed under the rules. After the 3rd playoff win of the lucky trade recipient of the roster dump, a majority of the league got tired of playing for 2nd place, and quit, with the league folding. Perhaps an extreme and unusual outcome, but I saw it happen.

Care to tell us the details of the trade?

 

[DropKick]

I'm done here... Obviously, you can play by whatever rules you choose. I think some are missing the concept of "sportsmanship". Without that, it is always going to be all about your team.

 

[Mister CIA]

I'm done here... Obviously, you can play by whatever rules you choose. I think some are missing the concept of "sportsmanship". Without that, it is always going to be all about your team.

Lack of sportmanship will fracture any league regardless of the rules.

 

[Tornacl]

I can tell what my intent was. Tdmills figured it out, too, so it couldn't have been that opaque. Sorry for stripping your post of "context", but this entire thread is context, and I didn't feel like continuing to nest quotes 12 deep when anyone who wanted to read the original context could just read any of the 12 posts in the string you had been responding to. Do you feel like I unfairly characterized any of your points, or committed any other offenses that would have been ameliorated by the addition of context?

Apparently you had a little trouble understanding my post ("incoherent" was the word you used), so I'll boil it down for you. Let's say you have an amazing team- top 5 QB, two top 10 RBs, three top 20 WRs, and a top 5 TE. Let's say you also have awesome depth at all positions- a second top 10 QB, a top 20 RB, a top 30 WR, and a top 10 TE. Now, let's say your suffer an injury at QB. Through no fault of your own, you no longer have awesome depth at that position, do you? Through no fault of your own, you are now SHALLOW at that position. Without the possibility of trades to rectify this situation, you will continue through the playoffs SHALLOW at that position- not because you didn't have the foresight to prepare, but because you had the misfortune of suffering an injury. If you suffer a second injury at that position, your entire season is sunk, not because you didn't have depth, but because you were unlucky and the trade deadline left you with no recourse.

Let's give another example- let's say that you have two equal teams, neither of which has any depth. Let's say team A suffers and injury and team B does not. Team B now wins, not because it was better or deeper, but because it was luckier and team A was left with no recourse thanks to the trade deadline.

Let's give another example. Let's say that team A and team B are equal in all respects, and that both have great depth at RB and terrible depth at WR. Let's say team A suffers an injury at RB, and team B suffers an injury at WR. Team B gets screwed by luck, because the trade deadline prevents them from trading that RB depth for WR depth.

Again, all of these examples are situations where luck, not superior roster construction, are giving the title to one team over another. Your solution is to just compile quality depth at every position. This is often a pipe dream- few people have the assets to acquire quality depth at every position, and a superior strategy is to have quality depth at one position that can be easily converted to quality depth at another position should a need arise. Trade deadlines end that roster flexibility.

I understand that you and I have completely different dynasty mindsets. You have told me in the past that your philosophy is heavily based on the fact that leagues don't last long, so you gotta get yours while you can before it folds. Based on that mindset, and if you play with other owners with a similar mindset, a fondness for a trade deadline makes sense. I already said as much in my first post in this thread- if you think teams are going to mortgage the future to make a run now and then bail, then yeah, have a trade deadline. If men were angels, no government would be needed. Men are not angels, so if you need to put rules in place because you don't trust your league mates, then go for it. As has been mentioned, though, that's more a problem with your leaguemates than it is a problem with removing trade deadlines.

Then why have rosters at all? Just play Fanduel style and take all the injury/health "luck" out of it.I don't like dynasty leagues generally. I played in one league for 5 or so years that was a Keep-6 and it was terrible. We had Tomlinson, Priest Holmes, Torry Holt, and 3 other top-50 guys. It's too easy to ruin a league with too many keepers.

That said, the reason you have a trade deadline is to temper trades. The closer you get to the fantasy championship, the more certainty there is in outcomes. At the extreme example, someone would be very willing to do an unbalanced trade an hour before the championship starts because they know it will affect the outcome and their chance at winning. And on the other side, their trading partner will be more than happy to give up value-now to get value-later since they're completely eliminated from contention. And once you get to that, then the league becomes less about who drafts and prepares better and who is more willing to sell out future seasons to win this season. You don't need guys who are going to bail to make that happen. You just need someone who decides that they're fine with taking their lumps for 2 rebuilding years to win this year. And for me, that's not what fantasy sports are about. I'd rather play in leagues that everyone goes into the year playing to win for that year.

Considering the number and nature of collusion threads we already see, can you imagine the potential controversy and heart burn with trades during FF playoffs?

He just said that he doesn't even like dynasty leagues, but still I'm sure he's had great experience with them, after all, he once played in a keeper league.

Your reading comprehension is nil. He has the right not to like dynasty leagues but he also recognized the main issues with not having a trade deadline: "the league becomes less about who drafts and prepares better and who is more willing to sell out future seasons to win this season".

Give me a break, whose reading comprehension is nil? He said that he doesn't like dynasty leagues because he once was in a 6-player keeper league - that isn't even a dynasty league! Why should anyone value the opinion of someone who admittedly has ZERO experience relevant to the topic? There is a big difference between keeper leagues and dynasty leagues - something that neither of the two of you appear to understand. Why don't you go back to elementary school and learn to read what he wrote. Until then, shouldn't your mom limit your computer time or something?

Yours... My God! Can't you read?ETA: Incidentally, the poll is a landslide.

A six-player keeper league is NOT a dynasty league. That was my point, but obviously you don't have the intellect to understand that. For someone to offer an opinion on something that they know nothing about (by their own admission) lessens the value of the opinion. The problems that most people have attributed to having no trade deadline were either a) a result of bad owners - collusion, bailing on the league, etc. or b)problems that they assumed would happen.I could care less how the poll results come out. I would rather come to my own conclusion and be in the minority than to blindly follow everyone else and be "right."

Dynasty leagues aren't for everyone, but if you want to make a dynasty league just like a re-draft league - just stick to re-draft. But either way, get a bunch of good owners who aren't going anywhere, and you'll have more fun no matter what rules you decide on.

 

[Jersey35]

Trading is pretty fun. More of it = better, as long as you are able to identify and prevent collusion. Having owners you trust and expect to stick around is probably pretty important too. Not sure why a lot of you are playing in dynasty/keeper leagues with people who you don't trust or don't understand how a dynasty league works, but it doesn't sound like the problem is a trade deadline, it sounds like a membership issue.

If you're really worried about people bailing, you need to structure the league rules so that it is intrinsically 'fun', encourages fresh playoff participation, and gives everyone as much freedom and ownership over their annual investment as possible. Once you've done that, you won't have to worry about collusion, bailing, etc.

But first, get decent owners.

 

[Tornacl]

Trading is pretty fun. More of it = better, as long as you are able to identify and prevent collusion. Having owners you trust and expect to stick around is probably pretty important too. Not sure why a lot of you are playing in dynasty/keeper leagues with people who you don't trust or don't understand how a dynasty league works, but it doesn't sound like the problem is a trade deadline, it sounds like a membership issue.If you're really worried about people bailing, you need to structure the league rules so that it is intrinsically 'fun', encourages fresh playoff participation, and gives everyone as much freedom and ownership over their annual investment as possible. Once you've done that, you won't have to worry about collusion, bailing, etc.But first, get decent owners.

 

[SSOG]

The NFL is a very different entity than a fantasy league. The NFL is a multibillion dollar industry, and as I've said a half dozen times already, money is extremely corrosive to integrity, so sometimes you need to adopt bad or inefficient or suboptimal rules to protect against underhanded dealings. My fantasy league is not a multibillion dollar industry, so that is less of a concern. The NFL's primary goal is not for its 32 owners to have loads of fun, it's to maximize profit. My fantasy league doesn't turn a profit- its sole reason for existence is for the owners to have fun, so there's a much stronger case for allowing rules that are fun (trading is fun!) but not necessarily profit-maximizing (trading is an inefficient use of monetary resources, because you're paying full salary for a player that is not fully integrated in your scheme).

Money is also corrosive to the the integrity of dynasty leagues but that is not applicable to you since you play exclusively in free leagues, right? Collusion between owners will only buy one of them bragging rights in your leagues, but in my leagues two teams could agree to rent a player during the playoffs (to be traded back the following summer in a trade ostensibly for value) and split a $500 jackpot. So, of course, you league's sole existance is just to have fun, while mine is win cold hard cash and secondarily have fun (I wouldn't play in a free league since the joy of competition with no reward is not worth the time expenditure).

Mostly free leagues. Some small money leagues ($20 or $50). I've also done a $100 league and a $250 league, but both were redraft. But yes, I recognize that large payouts can skew behavior, which is why I have said in maybe 50% of my posts in this thread that I can see exceptions being made in leagues with large enough pots. As I've said more than a half dozen times now, if men were angels, no government would be needed. I already had an entire post in this thread covering the difference in our backgrounds (I mostly play for fun, you mostly play for money) and philosophy (I mostly assume my leagues are stable and enduring, you mostly assume your leagues are unstable and temporary), and detailing how those different backgrounds play into our opinions on trade deadlines. Seriously, do I need to cover this again? Trade deadlines are a burden that are largely unnecessary. If a large enough enticement exists that you can no longer rely on your leaguemates' integrity, though, sometimes it becomes necessary to impose unnecessary burdens to limit any possibility of cheating. These burdens can range from moderately cumbersome (trade deadlines) to extremely unwieldy (no-trade leagues), usually in direct relation to the size of the enticement to cheat. This isn't because trade deadlines are good policy- they aren't- it's because sometimes you need to adopt bad policy, cumbersome and burdensome rules, in order to ensure that enforcement of the rules is more consistent. In short: trade deadlines = bad, but on rare occasions a necessary evil.

I'm done here... Obviously, you can play by whatever rules you choose. I think some are missing the concept of "sportsmanship". Without that, it is always going to be all about your team.

If you want to promote sportsmanship, creating a trade deadline rule is an awfully poor way to do it. The leagues I commish have a sportsmanship rule, instead. It's much more effective at promoting sportsmanship than a trade deadline would be.Again, it sounds like a lot of the pro-deadline crowd is creating a solution in search of a problem. If you're worried about collusion, make rules against collusion. If you are worried about people bailing, make rules demanding future entry fees up front (to discourage bailing and make replacing abandoned owners easier). If you're worried about player renting, outlaw player renting. If you're worried about poor sportsmanship, make sportsmanship rules. If you don't want people tanking, make anti-tanking rules. If you want owners actively giving their best every season, create enticements (toilet bowls, most improved team awards, etc). Using a trade deadline to fix any of these problems is an extremely inefficient way to go about it, and the results may or may not be what you're hoping for.