What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Should we just shut it regarding this trade? (1 Viewer)

Approve the trade?

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 16.7%
  • No

    Votes: 50 83.3%

  • Total voters
    60
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow!! I didn't expect this to get that much attention. Quite a debate here (even if 60% of it comes from one person). :wink:

Because some have asked, here are the full standings (place, record, pts - tiebreaker) and the RBs/WRs on each of the 2 teams involved. Standard start 1-2-2-flex-1-1-1, half ppr.

1) 9-1 1179.80 (Team A in trade)
2) 9-1 1057.50
3) 7-3 1138.74
4) 6-4 1157.40
5) 5-5 1100.30
6) 5-5 1060.80
7) 3-7 1058.84
8) 3-7 1057.20
9) 2-8 942.37
10) 2-8 940.58 (Team B in trade)

I don't know if Team B has officially been eliminated. Technically, he could finish 6-8 and so could the fourth place team and obviously the last place team could pass the fourth place team in points also. But I haven't analyzed if Team B could pass all the others also - I would think not due to them all playing each other.

Team A - Ekeler, Stevenson, Wilson, Henderson, Connor, Hopkins, Schuster, Godwin, Boyd
Team B - Cook, Patterson, Harris, Allgeier, Cooper, K. Allen, Jeudy, Hardman, Thielen, Hollins, M. Brown

Other notes - the money ($100/team) is irrelevant to everyone. It is about bragging rights. It is a local team and these 2 are not the only set of friends in the league, in fact everyone is at least "friendly" even if they don't hang out together. Trade deadline is in 2 days. No voting rules for trades, commissioner decision only, although he solicited everyone's opinion and will take those into account as well as the results of this poll.

Again, Team A would receive Cook & Harris, Team B would receive Connor & Henderson. Commissioner will rule by gametime tonight.

Thanks to everyone who has given their input in this thread!
Thanks for posting the rosters!!

And this is a bit as I suspected. Cook will be a flex for Team A. Personally I value Stevenson above Cook.

Cook could easily lose out the flex spot to Godwin based on matchup.

Team B is bad at RB. Patterson killed them with injury and Harris has also underperformed with a role that is declining.

But I see that Team B has both Patterson and Allgeier and now they will have 2/3ds of the Ram back field. They may just prefer having a teams backfield. They certainly had time to move on from Atlanta’s backfield but may be lured by their commitment to the run game. The same optics may be at play with the Rams here as well.

But, Team B NEEDED to make moves weeks ago but they held on to injured players like Patterson and Keenan Allen.

They are 2-8 for not making moves and then finally when they make a move they get dragged.
So lets get this straight....They werent willing to make trades to improve their team and now are 2-8 so NOW at 2-8 they decide to make a trade that appears to be giving up the 2 best rb's in the trade with his buddy? And that is not suspicious to you? I think if this were a jury trial the jury would point at this point where you lost all credibility and lost the case.
LOL. Suspicious is the best you’ve got. You’d have to prove it to a jury.
You would have zero credibility with a jury after a comment like that. At that point they would ignore all your blah blah blah as is their right to do. Sorry for you but you just stepped in it and would lose HUGEEEEE.
What comment?

My stance has been I do not need to answer the commissioners questions. You’d need to prove collusion and I’m not compelled to self incriminate regardless of a civil type of suit.

All you have is subjective opinions until the season plays out. If Conner and Cook are at all close in points post trade you’ve lost your argument.

But what are you going to prove? That a 9-1 team continued to win and a 2-8 team continued to lose?
Look, I've already kicked you out of the league, so why are you still posting here? Just move on with your life.
Yikes...for real? if so did the 9-1 team get kicked out as well?
 
Wow!! I didn't expect this to get that much attention. Quite a debate here (even if 60% of it comes from one person). :wink:

Because some have asked, here are the full standings (place, record, pts - tiebreaker) and the RBs/WRs on each of the 2 teams involved. Standard start 1-2-2-flex-1-1-1, half ppr.

1) 9-1 1179.80 (Team A in trade)
2) 9-1 1057.50
3) 7-3 1138.74
4) 6-4 1157.40
5) 5-5 1100.30
6) 5-5 1060.80
7) 3-7 1058.84
8) 3-7 1057.20
9) 2-8 942.37
10) 2-8 940.58 (Team B in trade)

I don't know if Team B has officially been eliminated. Technically, he could finish 6-8 and so could the fourth place team and obviously the last place team could pass the fourth place team in points also. But I haven't analyzed if Team B could pass all the others also - I would think not due to them all playing each other.

Team A - Ekeler, Stevenson, Wilson, Henderson, Connor, Hopkins, Schuster, Godwin, Boyd
Team B - Cook, Patterson, Harris, Allgeier, Cooper, K. Allen, Jeudy, Hardman, Thielen, Hollins, M. Brown

Other notes - the money ($100/team) is irrelevant to everyone. It is about bragging rights. It is a local team and these 2 are not the only set of friends in the league, in fact everyone is at least "friendly" even if they don't hang out together. Trade deadline is in 2 days. No voting rules for trades, commissioner decision only, although he solicited everyone's opinion and will take those into account as well as the results of this poll.

Again, Team A would receive Cook & Harris, Team B would receive Connor & Henderson. Commissioner will rule by gametime tonight.

Thanks to everyone who has given their input in this thread!
Thanks for posting the rosters!!

And this is a bit as I suspected. Cook will be a flex for Team A. Personally I value Stevenson above Cook.

Cook could easily lose out the flex spot to Godwin based on matchup.

Team B is bad at RB. Patterson killed them with injury and Harris has also underperformed with a role that is declining.

But I see that Team B has both Patterson and Allgeier and now they will have 2/3ds of the Ram back field. They may just prefer having a teams backfield. They certainly had time to move on from Atlanta’s backfield but may be lured by their commitment to the run game. The same optics may be at play with the Rams here as well.

But, Team B NEEDED to make moves weeks ago but they held on to injured players like Patterson and Keenan Allen.

They are 2-8 for not making moves and then finally when they make a move they get dragged.
So lets get this straight....They werent willing to make trades to improve their team and now are 2-8 so NOW at 2-8 they decide to make a trade that appears to be giving up the 2 best rb's in the trade with his buddy? And that is not suspicious to you? I think if this were a jury trial the jury would point at this point where you lost all credibility and lost the case.
LOL. Suspicious is the best you’ve got. You’d have to prove it to a jury.
You would have zero credibility with a jury after a comment like that. At that point they would ignore all your blah blah blah as is their right to do. Sorry for you but you just stepped in it and would lose HUGEEEEE.
What comment?

My stance has been I do not need to answer the commissioners questions. You’d need to prove collusion and I’m not compelled to self incriminate regardless of a civil type of suit.

All you have is subjective opinions until the season plays out. If Conner and Cook are at all close in points post trade you’ve lost your argument.

But what are you going to prove? That a 9-1 team continued to win and a 2-8 team continued to lose?
Look, I've already kicked you out of the league, so why are you still posting here? Just move on with your life.
Yikes...for real? if so did the 9-1 team get kicked out as well?
LOL, I'm not in his league. Sorry, but I had to have my fun with that.
 
Wow!! I didn't expect this to get that much attention. Quite a debate here (even if 60% of it comes from one person). :wink:

Because some have asked, here are the full standings (place, record, pts - tiebreaker) and the RBs/WRs on each of the 2 teams involved. Standard start 1-2-2-flex-1-1-1, half ppr.

1) 9-1 1179.80 (Team A in trade)
2) 9-1 1057.50
3) 7-3 1138.74
4) 6-4 1157.40
5) 5-5 1100.30
6) 5-5 1060.80
7) 3-7 1058.84
8) 3-7 1057.20
9) 2-8 942.37
10) 2-8 940.58 (Team B in trade)

I don't know if Team B has officially been eliminated. Technically, he could finish 6-8 and so could the fourth place team and obviously the last place team could pass the fourth place team in points also. But I haven't analyzed if Team B could pass all the others also - I would think not due to them all playing each other.

Team A - Ekeler, Stevenson, Wilson, Henderson, Connor, Hopkins, Schuster, Godwin, Boyd
Team B - Cook, Patterson, Harris, Allgeier, Cooper, K. Allen, Jeudy, Hardman, Thielen, Hollins, M. Brown

Other notes - the money ($100/team) is irrelevant to everyone. It is about bragging rights. It is a local team and these 2 are not the only set of friends in the league, in fact everyone is at least "friendly" even if they don't hang out together. Trade deadline is in 2 days. No voting rules for trades, commissioner decision only, although he solicited everyone's opinion and will take those into account as well as the results of this poll.

Again, Team A would receive Cook & Harris, Team B would receive Connor & Henderson. Commissioner will rule by gametime tonight.

Thanks to everyone who has given their input in this thread!
Thanks for posting the rosters!!

And this is a bit as I suspected. Cook will be a flex for Team A. Personally I value Stevenson above Cook.

Cook could easily lose out the flex spot to Godwin based on matchup.

Team B is bad at RB. Patterson killed them with injury and Harris has also underperformed with a role that is declining.

But I see that Team B has both Patterson and Allgeier and now they will have 2/3ds of the Ram back field. They may just prefer having a teams backfield. They certainly had time to move on from Atlanta’s backfield but may be lured by their commitment to the run game. The same optics may be at play with the Rams here as well.

But, Team B NEEDED to make moves weeks ago but they held on to injured players like Patterson and Keenan Allen.

They are 2-8 for not making moves and then finally when they make a move they get dragged.
So lets get this straight....They werent willing to make trades to improve their team and now are 2-8 so NOW at 2-8 they decide to make a trade that appears to be giving up the 2 best rb's in the trade with his buddy? And that is not suspicious to you? I think if this were a jury trial the jury would point at this point where you lost all credibility and lost the case.
LOL. Suspicious is the best you’ve got. You’d have to prove it to a jury.
You would have zero credibility with a jury after a comment like that. At that point they would ignore all your blah blah blah as is their right to do. Sorry for you but you just stepped in it and would lose HUGEEEEE.
What comment?

My stance has been I do not need to answer the commissioners questions. You’d need to prove collusion and I’m not compelled to self incriminate regardless of a civil type of suit.

All you have is subjective opinions until the season plays out. If Conner and Cook are at all close in points post trade you’ve lost your argument.

But what are you going to prove? That a 9-1 team continued to win and a 2-8 team continued to lose?
Look, I've already kicked you out of the league, so why are you still posting here? Just move on with your life.
I tried to move on with my life but this is my life now.
 
Wow!! I didn't expect this to get that much attention. Quite a debate here (even if 60% of it comes from one person). :wink:

Because some have asked, here are the full standings (place, record, pts - tiebreaker) and the RBs/WRs on each of the 2 teams involved. Standard start 1-2-2-flex-1-1-1, half ppr.

1) 9-1 1179.80 (Team A in trade)
2) 9-1 1057.50
3) 7-3 1138.74
4) 6-4 1157.40
5) 5-5 1100.30
6) 5-5 1060.80
7) 3-7 1058.84
8) 3-7 1057.20
9) 2-8 942.37
10) 2-8 940.58 (Team B in trade)

I don't know if Team B has officially been eliminated. Technically, he could finish 6-8 and so could the fourth place team and obviously the last place team could pass the fourth place team in points also. But I haven't analyzed if Team B could pass all the others also - I would think not due to them all playing each other.

Team A - Ekeler, Stevenson, Wilson, Henderson, Connor, Hopkins, Schuster, Godwin, Boyd
Team B - Cook, Patterson, Harris, Allgeier, Cooper, K. Allen, Jeudy, Hardman, Thielen, Hollins, M. Brown

Other notes - the money ($100/team) is irrelevant to everyone. It is about bragging rights. It is a local team and these 2 are not the only set of friends in the league, in fact everyone is at least "friendly" even if they don't hang out together. Trade deadline is in 2 days. No voting rules for trades, commissioner decision only, although he solicited everyone's opinion and will take those into account as well as the results of this poll.

Again, Team A would receive Cook & Harris, Team B would receive Connor & Henderson. Commissioner will rule by gametime tonight.

Thanks to everyone who has given their input in this thread!
Thanks for posting the rosters!!

And this is a bit as I suspected. Cook will be a flex for Team A. Personally I value Stevenson above Cook.

Cook could easily lose out the flex spot to Godwin based on matchup.

Team B is bad at RB. Patterson killed them with injury and Harris has also underperformed with a role that is declining.

But I see that Team B has both Patterson and Allgeier and now they will have 2/3ds of the Ram back field. They may just prefer having a teams backfield. They certainly had time to move on from Atlanta’s backfield but may be lured by their commitment to the run game. The same optics may be at play with the Rams here as well.

But, Team B NEEDED to make moves weeks ago but they held on to injured players like Patterson and Keenan Allen.

They are 2-8 for not making moves and then finally when they make a move they get dragged.
So lets get this straight....They werent willing to make trades to improve their team and now are 2-8 so NOW at 2-8 they decide to make a trade that appears to be giving up the 2 best rb's in the trade with his buddy? And that is not suspicious to you? I think if this were a jury trial the jury would point at this point where you lost all credibility and lost the case.
LOL. Suspicious is the best you’ve got. You’d have to prove it to a jury.
You would have zero credibility with a jury after a comment like that. At that point they would ignore all your blah blah blah as is their right to do. Sorry for you but you just stepped in it and would lose HUGEEEEE.
What comment?

My stance has been I do not need to answer the commissioners questions. You’d need to prove collusion and I’m not compelled to self incriminate regardless of a civil type of suit.

All you have is subjective opinions until the season plays out. If Conner and Cook are at all close in points post trade you’ve lost your argument.

But what are you going to prove? That a 9-1 team continued to win and a 2-8 team continued to lose?
Look, I've already kicked you out of the league, so why are you still posting here? Just move on with your life.
I tried to move on with my life but this is my life now.
At least you are a good sport.
 
Wow!! I didn't expect this to get that much attention. Quite a debate here (even if 60% of it comes from one person). :wink:

Because some have asked, here are the full standings (place, record, pts - tiebreaker) and the RBs/WRs on each of the 2 teams involved. Standard start 1-2-2-flex-1-1-1, half ppr.

1) 9-1 1179.80 (Team A in trade)
2) 9-1 1057.50
3) 7-3 1138.74
4) 6-4 1157.40
5) 5-5 1100.30
6) 5-5 1060.80
7) 3-7 1058.84
8) 3-7 1057.20
9) 2-8 942.37
10) 2-8 940.58 (Team B in trade)

I don't know if Team B has officially been eliminated. Technically, he could finish 6-8 and so could the fourth place team and obviously the last place team could pass the fourth place team in points also. But I haven't analyzed if Team B could pass all the others also - I would think not due to them all playing each other.

Team A - Ekeler, Stevenson, Wilson, Henderson, Connor, Hopkins, Schuster, Godwin, Boyd
Team B - Cook, Patterson, Harris, Allgeier, Cooper, K. Allen, Jeudy, Hardman, Thielen, Hollins, M. Brown

Other notes - the money ($100/team) is irrelevant to everyone. It is about bragging rights. It is a local team and these 2 are not the only set of friends in the league, in fact everyone is at least "friendly" even if they don't hang out together. Trade deadline is in 2 days. No voting rules for trades, commissioner decision only, although he solicited everyone's opinion and will take those into account as well as the results of this poll.

Again, Team A would receive Cook & Harris, Team B would receive Connor & Henderson. Commissioner will rule by gametime tonight.

Thanks to everyone who has given their input in this thread!
Thanks for posting the rosters!!

And this is a bit as I suspected. Cook will be a flex for Team A. Personally I value Stevenson above Cook.

Cook could easily lose out the flex spot to Godwin based on matchup.

Team B is bad at RB. Patterson killed them with injury and Harris has also underperformed with a role that is declining.

But I see that Team B has both Patterson and Allgeier and now they will have 2/3ds of the Ram back field. They may just prefer having a teams backfield. They certainly had time to move on from Atlanta’s backfield but may be lured by their commitment to the run game. The same optics may be at play with the Rams here as well.

But, Team B NEEDED to make moves weeks ago but they held on to injured players like Patterson and Keenan Allen.

They are 2-8 for not making moves and then finally when they make a move they get dragged.
So lets get this straight....They werent willing to make trades to improve their team and now are 2-8 so NOW at 2-8 they decide to make a trade that appears to be giving up the 2 best rb's in the trade with his buddy? And that is not suspicious to you? I think if this were a jury trial the jury would point at this point where you lost all credibility and lost the case.
LOL. Suspicious is the best you’ve got. You’d have to prove it to a jury.
You would have zero credibility with a jury after a comment like that. At that point they would ignore all your blah blah blah as is their right to do. Sorry for you but you just stepped in it and would lose HUGEEEEE.
What comment?

My stance has been I do not need to answer the commissioners questions. You’d need to prove collusion and I’m not compelled to self incriminate regardless of a civil type of suit.

All you have is subjective opinions until the season plays out. If Conner and Cook are at all close in points post trade you’ve lost your argument.

But what are you going to prove? That a 9-1 team continued to win and a 2-8 team continued to lose?
Look, I've already kicked you out of the league, so why are you still posting here? Just move on with your life.
Yikes...for real? if so did the 9-1 team get kicked out as well?
LOL, I'm not in his league. Sorry, but I had to have my fun with that.
lol ok.... that would have been epic..... If the commish of this league is a fbg member he has probably seen quite enough to convince him that this was indeed collusion. Its pretty odd that a person would take the stance that he will not discuss the trade with the commish yet discusses the trade over and over and over in public.
 
Hey Stig....I thought you would get a kick out of this. I was so busy reading this and responding that I lost track of time and forgot to submit my waiver wire picks. When I looked it was 12.07....deadline was 12 midnight.
 
I’m checking my Yahoo league rules and my pocket copy of the Constitution and it doesn’t say I have to rationalize YOUR accusation.
You can do what you want but it doesn't change that as a commish you have the right to ask an owner what they were thinking on a trade to get clarity. The fact is the rest of the league is going to come banging on the Commish's door after something like this and he needs to be prepared to answer their concerns. In order to do that he needs to understand the rationale of the last place team so he can either defend him or chastise him.

Also, this isn't an accusation. This is an inquiry. I ask other league members all the time after trades why they did it or how they valued people so I can understand how they think. It's a simple question and doesn't have to be accusatory.
You can say what you want but as a Fantasy League Commish you have less authority than a dog catcher. If you get a promotion from your Commish position you can serve on the architectural committee of your HOA board and you can approve decks and patios.

You literally have zero authority as a commissioner. Sure, kick me out of the league, just give me my money back but make no mistake, I owe you ZERO explanation. Deny my trade and give me my money back. Don’t like my non-rational, fine, give me my money back. I’m 2-8, I’d gladly take my money back.
I am going on a limb now and suggesting you caused this controversy on purpose in hopes of getting your money back. Im guessing that limb will break and you will fall to the ground without a single extra cent in your pockets, lol
And again, I’m 2-8, I don’t care. It is easy enough here online to just kick the Stig out of the league.

The reality is far messier than that. We know most leagues are friend based and are not made up of professionals.

Good luck kicking a friend out and keeping their money over this trade. If you do you played yourself as a douche.

No, you need to defend overruling a trade and THEN I explain my rational. It doesn’t work the other way around.
Actually, from a commish standpoint you do have to defend the trade. The rationale is really all that matters in a trade like this. If the last place team cannot provide a realistic (even implausible but realistic) reason for how they think it is better for their team then it leans to collusion (or more likely apathy) and then it shouldn't be allowed.

As a commish you have to find the balance of letting owners run their teams how they see fit and the competitive balance of the league. You want the league to be on the up and up and part of that is working with owners on the perception of bad trades to figure out if it is an owner running the team the way they want because it's what they want to do or if apathy/collusion led to the deal.

The biggest factor here is the relative placement of the teams. The trade seems lopsided but maybe the last place guy really wants Conner and things he is going to bust out the final half while hating the Vikings and Dalvin's 81 yd TD vs his Bills team. The owner comes back with that I likely say ok you had your reasons. Not what I would do but at least you thought about it and had a reason you were doing it beyond apathy or he's my buddy and wanted Cook/Harris.
well reasoned thoughts. There IS a reason to let this trade stand but before that happens the discussion has to happen between the commish and the 2-8 guy.
No it doesn’t

Dude paid for his team, he runs his own team however he wants. If you don’t want him to play next year then that’s a different convo
Commishs duties include looking for rationale for suspicious trade. Sorry but for the integrity of the league this gets decided this year. However he wants DOES NOT give him the right to make collusive trades. When there is money involved a good ccommish will always be on the lookout for suspicious traades (which doesnt at all mean he needs go veto every lopsided trade.
Integrity of the league? Let’s not get carried away here. It’s a fantasy football league

Anyway, what are you going to say to the guy you’re accusing of cheating when the players he’s trying to trade blow their knees out this weekend? Sorry??
 
I’m checking my Yahoo league rules and my pocket copy of the Constitution and it doesn’t say I have to rationalize YOUR accusation.
You can do what you want but it doesn't change that as a commish you have the right to ask an owner what they were thinking on a trade to get clarity. The fact is the rest of the league is going to come banging on the Commish's door after something like this and he needs to be prepared to answer their concerns. In order to do that he needs to understand the rationale of the last place team so he can either defend him or chastise him.

Also, this isn't an accusation. This is an inquiry. I ask other league members all the time after trades why they did it or how they valued people so I can understand how they think. It's a simple question and doesn't have to be accusatory.
You can say what you want but as a Fantasy League Commish you have less authority than a dog catcher. If you get a promotion from your Commish position you can serve on the architectural committee of your HOA board and you can approve decks and patios.

You literally have zero authority as a commissioner. Sure, kick me out of the league, just give me my money back but make no mistake, I owe you ZERO explanation. Deny my trade and give me my money back. Don’t like my non-rational, fine, give me my money back. I’m 2-8, I’d gladly take my money back.
I am going on a limb now and suggesting you caused this controversy on purpose in hopes of getting your money back. Im guessing that limb will break and you will fall to the ground without a single extra cent in your pockets, lol
And again, I’m 2-8, I don’t care. It is easy enough here online to just kick the Stig out of the league.

The reality is far messier than that. We know most leagues are friend based and are not made up of professionals.

Good luck kicking a friend out and keeping their money over this trade. If you do you played yourself as a douche.
Thats one of the big problems here..... if youre 2-8 and do not care whatch doing making lopsided trades with your buddy? Better yet why are you making trades at all? Does your league have a trade deadline? most leagues do and ours is this week. The reason for that is to prevent trades like this. (or to remove the temptation to do so )
Because I can and it is the only way I can play. (Of course we all understand that I’m not really the 2-8 player that everything I’m saying is pure speculation.)

But the reality is the 2-8 guy isn’t allowed to play anymore and the 9-1 guy is scrutinized for any trade that makes his team better.

As this thread has demonstrated by my pushing the extremes of the Devils Advocate is that a league can be pushed to kick two players out over suspicion, optics and most of all pure envy over what time may prove to be a fairly inconsequential trade.

I really do get and understand all the anti arguments of the trade but competitive balance to me would be making a 5-5 team a sudden powerhouse not the dominant 9-1 team.

It takes roster depth and capital to make significant trades, this 2-8 guy had nothing to trade to improve. He was in fantasy purgatory with his roster.

All that said, I’m all for clear bylaws and guideposts in leagues. I’ve played for over 30 years and I’ve never had the problems that are brought up annually on this site. I’ve had to fax rosters in.

But what I’m always going to be against is trade vetos and overly involved commissioners. You have to balance fun with fun and integrity. Don’t take it so seriously.
 
Hey Stig....I thought you would get a kick out of this. I was so busy reading this and responding that I lost track of time and forgot to submit my waiver wire picks. When I looked it was 12.07....deadline was 12 midnight.
LOL!! I apologize for that. 😬I hope you’re still able to get your guys.
 
You literally have zero authority as a commissioner.
If that is your thought then there really isn't any need to discuss anything further. You and I will likely never be in a league together.

The Commish has authority of that league. That is why the Commish was chosen...........to govern and rule on disputes. If an owner doesn't abide by the rules that all league members agree to then the Commish's job is to remove that guy (likely without a refund depending on the reason for removal......my leagues have stipulations in the bylaws as to how you can lose your entrance fees) if it is warranted based on that owner's actions.
LOL. By all means share the stipulation that allows you to keep my money over something subjective like a trade.

If there is a contract then and the amount was worth it then I’ll see you in small claims court.
Hey you could sure anybody for anything but when a judge hears the words 2-8 and describes what you did and hears the word cheat good luck winning that one. I wouldnt personally kick you out at this point but I WOULD bar you from making trades at this point because it is clear you no longer care (your words)
 
nd the commish
I’m checking my Yahoo league rules and my pocket copy of the Constitution and it doesn’t say I have to rationalize YOUR accusation.
You can do what you want but it doesn't change that as a commish you have the right to ask an owner what they were thinking on a trade to get clarity. The fact is the rest of the league is going to come banging on the Commish's door after something like this and he needs to be prepared to answer their concerns. In order to do that he needs to understand the rationale of the last place team so he can either defend him or chastise him.

Also, this isn't an accusation. This is an inquiry. I ask other league members all the time after trades why they did it or how they valued people so I can understand how they think. It's a simple question and doesn't have to be accusatory.
You can say what you want but as a Fantasy League Commish you have less authority than a dog catcher. If you get a promotion from your Commish position you can serve on the architectural committee of your HOA board and you can approve decks and patios.

You literally have zero authority as a commissioner. Sure, kick me out of the league, just give me my money back but make no mistake, I owe you ZERO explanation. Deny my trade and give me my money back. Don’t like my non-rational, fine, give me my money back. I’m 2-8, I’d gladly take my money back.
I am going on a limb now and suggesting you caused this controversy on purpose in hopes of getting your money back. Im guessing that limb will break and you will fall to the ground without a single extra cent in your pockets, lol
And again, I’m 2-8, I don’t care. It is easy enough here online to just kick the Stig out of the league.

The reality is far messier than that. We know most leagues are friend based and are not made up of professionals.

Good luck kicking a friend out and keeping their money over this trade. If you do you played yourself as a douche.

No, you need to defend overruling a trade and THEN I explain my rational. It doesn’t work the other way around.
Actually, from a commish standpoint you do have to defend the trade. The rationale is really all that matters in a trade like this. If the last place team cannot provide a realistic (even implausible but realistic) reason for how they think it is better for their team then it leans to collusion (or more likely apathy) and then it shouldn't be allowed.

As a commish you have to find the balance of letting owners run their teams how they see fit and the competitive balance of the league. You want the league to be on the up and up and part of that is working with owners on the perception of bad trades to figure out if it is an owner running the team the way they want because it's what they want to do or if apathy/collusion led to the deal.

The biggest factor here is the relative placement of the teams. The trade seems lopsided but maybe the last place guy really wants Conner and things he is going to bust out the final half while hating the Vikings and Dalvin's 81 yd TD vs his Bills team. The owner comes back with that I likely say ok you had your reasons. Not what I would do but at least you thought about it and had a reason you were doing it beyond apathy or he's my buddy and wanted Cook/Harris.
well reasoned thoughts. There IS a reason to let this trade stand but before that happens the discussion has to happen between the commish and the 2-8 guy.
No it doesn’t

Dude paid for his team, he runs his own team however he wants. If you don’t want him to play next year then that’s a different convo
Commishs duties include looking for rationale for suspicious trade. Sorry but for the integrity of the league this gets decided this year. However he wants DOES NOT give him the right to make collusive trades. When there is money involved a good ccommish will always be on the lookout for suspicious traades (which doesnt at all mean he needs go veto every lopsided trade.
Integrity of the league? Let’s not get carried away here. It’s a fantasy football league

Anyway, what are you going to say to the guy you’re accusing of cheating when the players he’s trying to trade blow their knees out this weekend? Sorry??
lets not get carried away now there is 1,200 dollars on the line in a 100 buy in league. Of course I believe the commish should guard the league against questionable trades. You wanna waste your $100 in a league where collusion is acceptable have at it....... play in a free league??? have at it....fun fun fun anything goes. If a guy blows his knee out I would say to him sorry about your luck....If you wanted to trade the guy away then you should have looked for a fair trade not trying to help your buddy out witha horribly lopsided trade.
 
Hey Stig....I thought you would get a kick out of this. I was so busy reading this and responding that I lost track of time and forgot to submit my waiver wire picks. When I looked it was 12.07....deadline was 12 midnight.
LOL!! I apologize for that. 😬I hope you’re still able to get your guys.
Ive got 9 minutes till fcfs opens..... I should be able to snag a couple of players......IF I stop typing. :laugh:
 
I’m checking my Yahoo league rules and my pocket copy of the Constitution and it doesn’t say I have to rationalize YOUR accusation.
You can do what you want but it doesn't change that as a commish you have the right to ask an owner what they were thinking on a trade to get clarity. The fact is the rest of the league is going to come banging on the Commish's door after something like this and he needs to be prepared to answer their concerns. In order to do that he needs to understand the rationale of the last place team so he can either defend him or chastise him.

Also, this isn't an accusation. This is an inquiry. I ask other league members all the time after trades why they did it or how they valued people so I can understand how they think. It's a simple question and doesn't have to be accusatory.
You can say what you want but as a Fantasy League Commish you have less authority than a dog catcher. If you get a promotion from your Commish position you can serve on the architectural committee of your HOA board and you can approve decks and patios.

You literally have zero authority as a commissioner. Sure, kick me out of the league, just give me my money back but make no mistake, I owe you ZERO explanation. Deny my trade and give me my money back. Don’t like my non-rational, fine, give me my money back. I’m 2-8, I’d gladly take my money back.
I am going on a limb now and suggesting you caused this controversy on purpose in hopes of getting your money back. Im guessing that limb will break and you will fall to the ground without a single extra cent in your pockets, lol
And again, I’m 2-8, I don’t care. It is easy enough here online to just kick the Stig out of the league.

The reality is far messier than that. We know most leagues are friend based and are not made up of professionals.

Good luck kicking a friend out and keeping their money over this trade. If you do you played yourself as a douche.
Thats one of the big problems here..... if youre 2-8 and do not care whatch doing making lopsided trades with your buddy? Better yet why are you making trades at all? Does your league have a trade deadline? most leagues do and ours is this week. The reason for that is to prevent trades like this. (or to remove the temptation to do so )
Because I can and it is the only way I can play. (Of course we all understand that I’m not really the 2-8 player that everything I’m saying is pure speculation.)

But the reality is the 2-8 guy isn’t allowed to play anymore and the 9-1 guy is scrutinized for any trade that makes his team better.

As this thread has demonstrated by my pushing the extremes of the Devils Advocate is that a league can be pushed to kick two players out over suspicion, optics and most of all pure envy over what time may prove to be a fairly inconsequential trade.

I really do get and understand all the anti arguments of the trade but competitive balance to me would be making a 5-5 team a sudden powerhouse not the dominant 9-1 team.

It takes roster depth and capital to make significant trades, this 2-8 guy had nothing to trade to improve. He was in fantasy purgatory with his roster.

All that said, I’m all for clear bylaws and guideposts in leagues. I’ve played for over 30 years and I’ve never had the problems that are brought up annually on this site. I’ve had to fax rosters in.

But what I’m always going to be against is trade vetos and overly involved commissioners. You have to balance fun with fun and integrity. Don’t take it so seriously.
I knew it was a schtick.
 
nd the commish
I’m checking my Yahoo league rules and my pocket copy of the Constitution and it doesn’t say I have to rationalize YOUR accusation.
You can do what you want but it doesn't change that as a commish you have the right to ask an owner what they were thinking on a trade to get clarity. The fact is the rest of the league is going to come banging on the Commish's door after something like this and he needs to be prepared to answer their concerns. In order to do that he needs to understand the rationale of the last place team so he can either defend him or chastise him.

Also, this isn't an accusation. This is an inquiry. I ask other league members all the time after trades why they did it or how they valued people so I can understand how they think. It's a simple question and doesn't have to be accusatory.
You can say what you want but as a Fantasy League Commish you have less authority than a dog catcher. If you get a promotion from your Commish position you can serve on the architectural committee of your HOA board and you can approve decks and patios.

You literally have zero authority as a commissioner. Sure, kick me out of the league, just give me my money back but make no mistake, I owe you ZERO explanation. Deny my trade and give me my money back. Don’t like my non-rational, fine, give me my money back. I’m 2-8, I’d gladly take my money back.
I am going on a limb now and suggesting you caused this controversy on purpose in hopes of getting your money back. Im guessing that limb will break and you will fall to the ground without a single extra cent in your pockets, lol
And again, I’m 2-8, I don’t care. It is easy enough here online to just kick the Stig out of the league.

The reality is far messier than that. We know most leagues are friend based and are not made up of professionals.

Good luck kicking a friend out and keeping their money over this trade. If you do you played yourself as a douche.

No, you need to defend overruling a trade and THEN I explain my rational. It doesn’t work the other way around.
Actually, from a commish standpoint you do have to defend the trade. The rationale is really all that matters in a trade like this. If the last place team cannot provide a realistic (even implausible but realistic) reason for how they think it is better for their team then it leans to collusion (or more likely apathy) and then it shouldn't be allowed.

As a commish you have to find the balance of letting owners run their teams how they see fit and the competitive balance of the league. You want the league to be on the up and up and part of that is working with owners on the perception of bad trades to figure out if it is an owner running the team the way they want because it's what they want to do or if apathy/collusion led to the deal.

The biggest factor here is the relative placement of the teams. The trade seems lopsided but maybe the last place guy really wants Conner and things he is going to bust out the final half while hating the Vikings and Dalvin's 81 yd TD vs his Bills team. The owner comes back with that I likely say ok you had your reasons. Not what I would do but at least you thought about it and had a reason you were doing it beyond apathy or he's my buddy and wanted Cook/Harris.
well reasoned thoughts. There IS a reason to let this trade stand but before that happens the discussion has to happen between the commish and the 2-8 guy.
No it doesn’t

Dude paid for his team, he runs his own team however he wants. If you don’t want him to play next year then that’s a different convo
Commishs duties include looking for rationale for suspicious trade. Sorry but for the integrity of the league this gets decided this year. However he wants DOES NOT give him the right to make collusive trades. When there is money involved a good ccommish will always be on the lookout for suspicious traades (which doesnt at all mean he needs go veto every lopsided trade.
Integrity of the league? Let’s not get carried away here. It’s a fantasy football league

Anyway, what are you going to say to the guy you’re accusing of cheating when the players he’s trying to trade blow their knees out this weekend? Sorry??
lets not get carried away now there is 1,200 dollars on the line in a 100 buy in league. Of course I believe the commish should guard the league against questionable trades. You wanna waste your $100 in a league where collusion is acceptable have at it....... play in a free league??? have at it....fun fun fun anything goes. If a guy blows his knee out I would say to him sorry about your luck....If you wanted to trade the guy away then you should have looked for a fair trade not trying to help your buddy out witha horribly lopsided trade.
Have fun micromanaging leagues and being micromanaged. Those must be some real fun leagues to play in

👍
 
The fact that anyone who plays this game is arguing that the trade should be pushed thru based on fairness is being obtuse .... one guy is out of it and the other guy is positioning to make a run at the money ...just stop , you look ridiculous
 
I’m checking my Yahoo league rules and my pocket copy of the Constitution and it doesn’t say I have to rationalize YOUR accusation.
You can do what you want but it doesn't change that as a commish you have the right to ask an owner what they were thinking on a trade to get clarity. The fact is the rest of the league is going to come banging on the Commish's door after something like this and he needs to be prepared to answer their concerns. In order to do that he needs to understand the rationale of the last place team so he can either defend him or chastise him.

Also, this isn't an accusation. This is an inquiry. I ask other league members all the time after trades why they did it or how they valued people so I can understand how they think. It's a simple question and doesn't have to be accusatory.
You can say what you want but as a Fantasy League Commish you have less authority than a dog catcher. If you get a promotion from your Commish position you can serve on the architectural committee of your HOA board and you can approve decks and patios.

You literally have zero authority as a commissioner. Sure, kick me out of the league, just give me my money back but make no mistake, I owe you ZERO explanation. Deny my trade and give me my money back. Don’t like my non-rational, fine, give me my money back. I’m 2-8, I’d gladly take my money back.
I am going on a limb now and suggesting you caused this controversy on purpose in hopes of getting your money back. Im guessing that limb will break and you will fall to the ground without a single extra cent in your pockets, lol
And again, I’m 2-8, I don’t care. It is easy enough here online to just kick the Stig out of the league.

The reality is far messier than that. We know most leagues are friend based and are not made up of professionals.

Good luck kicking a friend out and keeping their money over this trade. If you do you played yourself as a douche.
Thats one of the big problems here..... if youre 2-8 and do not care whatch doing making lopsided trades with your buddy? Better yet why are you making trades at all? Does your league have a trade deadline? most leagues do and ours is this week. The reason for that is to prevent trades like this. (or to remove the temptation to do so )
Because I can and it is the only way I can play. (Of course we all understand that I’m not really the 2-8 player that everything I’m saying is pure speculation.)

But the reality is the 2-8 guy isn’t allowed to play anymore and the 9-1 guy is scrutinized for any trade that makes his team better.

As this thread has demonstrated by my pushing the extremes of the Devils Advocate is that a league can be pushed to kick two players out over suspicion, optics and most of all pure envy over what time may prove to be a fairly inconsequential trade.

I really do get and understand all the anti arguments of the trade but competitive balance to me would be making a 5-5 team a sudden powerhouse not the dominant 9-1 team.

It takes roster depth and capital to make significant trades, this 2-8 guy had nothing to trade to improve. He was in fantasy purgatory with his roster.

All that said, I’m all for clear bylaws and guideposts in leagues. I’ve played for over 30 years and I’ve never had the problems that are brought up annually on this site. I’ve had to fax rosters in.

But what I’m always going to be against is trade vetos and overly involved commissioners. You have to balance fun with fun and integrity. Don’t take it so seriously.
Pure 100% unadulterated BS.
 
After 2 weeks and 275 posts on the topic I changed my mind.
-No One Ever
Actually in this very thread some one made a great point about the bye weeks and I did admit to changing my mind a bit on the legitimacy of the trade - although it I still think most in here were over-emotional based on name recognition and not necessarily statistics.
I do love how after a decent game by Harris (one of the few this season) some dumbass has to come in like some tough guy.
 
After 2 weeks and 275 posts on the topic I changed my mind.
-No One Ever
Actually in this very thread some one made a great point about the bye weeks and I did admit to changing my mind a bit on the legitimacy of the trade - although it I still think most in here were over-emotional based on name recognition and not necessarily statistics.
I do love how after a decent game by Harris (one of the few this season) some dumbass has to come in like some tough guy.
That was me too

LMAO
 
After 2 weeks and 275 posts on the topic I changed my mind.
-No One Ever
Actually in this very thread some one made a great point about the bye weeks and I did admit to changing my mind a bit on the legitimacy of the trade - although it I still think most in here were over-emotional based on name recognition and not necessarily statistics.
I do love how after a decent game by Harris (one of the few this season) some dumbass has to come in like some tough guy.
I was more laughing at Henderson getting waived not even a week after you said him and Harris were a wash but keep calling me a moron and a dumbass.
 
After 2 weeks and 275 posts on the topic I changed my mind.
-No One Ever
Actually in this very thread some one made a great point about the bye weeks and I did admit to changing my mind a bit on the legitimacy of the trade - although it I still think most in here were over-emotional based on name recognition and not necessarily statistics.
I do love how after a decent game by Harris (one of the few this season) some dumbass has to come in like some tough guy.
I was more laughing at Henderson getting waived not even a week after you said him and Harris were a wash but keep calling me a moron and a dumbass.
Actually I’ll put you on ignore where trolls belong.
 
After 2 weeks and 275 posts on the topic I changed my mind.
-No One Ever
Actually in this very thread some one made a great point about the bye weeks and I did admit to changing my mind a bit on the legitimacy of the trade - although it I still think most in here were over-emotional based on name recognition and not necessarily statistics.
I do love how after a decent game by Harris (one of the few this season) some dumbass has to come in like some tough guy.
I was more laughing at Henderson getting waived not even a week after you said him and Harris were a wash but keep calling me a moron and a dumbass.
Hey, now Henderson has the opportunity to go ELSEWHERE and do nothing!
 
After 2 weeks and 275 posts on the topic I changed my mind.
-No One Ever
Actually in this very thread some one made a great point about the bye weeks and I did admit to changing my mind a bit on the legitimacy of the trade - although it I still think most in here were over-emotional based on name recognition and not necessarily statistics.
I do love how after a decent game by Harris (one of the few this season) some dumbass has to come in like some tough guy.
I was more laughing at Henderson getting waived not even a week after you said him and Harris were a wash but keep calling me a moron and a dumbass.
Actually I’ll put you on ignore where trolls belong.
Lighten up man. Its ok to laugh at yourself a little in life.
 
After 2 weeks and 275 posts on the topic I changed my mind.
-No One Ever
Actually in this very thread some one made a great point about the bye weeks and I did admit to changing my mind a bit on the legitimacy of the trade - although it I still think most in here were over-emotional based on name recognition and not necessarily statistics.
I do love how after a decent game by Harris (one of the few this season) some dumbass has to come in like some tough guy.
I was more laughing at Henderson getting waived not even a week after you said him and Harris were a wash but keep calling me a moron and a dumbass.
Hey, now Henderson has the opportunity to go ELSEWHERE and do nothing!
He won't be washing his uniform anytime soon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top