Trade Issue in MFL League (1 Viewer)

[nysportsfan]

I did notice that there was some activity between two teams, and Mike brought this to our attention today. He wants us to weigh in. Here are the three trades in question:

# Franchise Type Transaction Date1. Team A / Team B Trade Team A gave up Jones, James GBP WR;Smith, Torrey BAL WR Team B gave up Jackson, DeSean PHI WR Tue Oct 18 9:29:23 a.m. ET 20112. Team A / Team B Trade Team A gave up Graham, Earnest TBB RB;Henderson, Devery NOS WR;Steelers, Pittsburgh PIT Def Team B gave up Barber, Marion CHI RB;Jackson, Steven STL RB Fri Oct 7 10:47:21 a.m. ET 20113. Team A / Team B Trade Team A gave up Rivers, Philip SDC QB;Hightower, Tim WAS RB;Tomlinson, LaDainian NYJ RB;Burress, Plaxico NYJ WR Team B gave up Ryan, Matt ATL QB;McFadden, Darren OAK RB;Reece, Marcel OAK RB;Branch, Deion NEP WR Fri Sep 23 10:02:09 a.m. ET 2011

Do I think Team B might be a little slow? Perhaps. Do I think there is collusion? I don't know. I think all together the trades are strange, but I'd hate to be the commish on this one. For the record, I am neither team, but thought that this might make an interesting conversation beyond collusion.1. What role does the commissioner play?2. How does your league handle something like this?3. Where would you side? 4. What's the correct protocol here?Team A posted something and it wasn't a nasty response.

 

[Captain Hook]

1) Are there trade rules for this league?

If so are these valid trades?

2) The Commissioner shouldn't be taking ANY action unless there is action by one of the other teams in the league or there is a procedure where a team (or multiple teams) can ask for either an explanation of the trades or for a league vote

Taken individually there is nothing wrong with any of these trades

However I can see someone looking at three trades between the same two teams giving an advantage to one of the teams causing some questions.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

I see nothing wrong.

 

[nysportsfan]

The only rule it says is that the commish has the right to overturn if there is collusion. But is there collusion? Team B is 0-6. Team A is in first place.

 

[Mario Kart]

Are the two teams owner's married?

And, for God's sake. This is the Shark Pool... not the "Evaluate my trade Pool". Can't even get good NFL news on the main page because of all the trade talks. Read, people, read.

 

[emge]

Are the two teams owner's married?And, for God's sake. This is the Shark Pool... not the "Evaluate my trade Pool". Can't even get good NFL news on the main page because of all the trade talks. Read, people, read.

agree... can some one move all these trade threads to the FFA or The Assistant Coach

 

[Captain Hook]

The only rule it says is that the commish has the right to overturn if there is collusion. But is there collusion? Team B is 0-6. Team A is in first place.

There is not a whiff of collusion......but there might be enough to contact these oweners individually - probably B first and ask him why he made each trade....as a commissioner I would NOT do that unless requested by someone in the league. Even if you talk to them I doubt you have enough to overturn them - absent proof of colluion

 

[habsfan]

I did notice that there was some activity between two teams, and Mike brought this to our attention today. He wants us to weigh in. Here are the three trades in question:

# Franchise Type Transaction Date

1. Team A / Team B Trade

Team A gave up Jones, James GBP WR;Smith, Torrey BAL WR

Team B gave up Jackson, DeSean PHI WR

Tue Oct 18 9:29:23 a.m. ET 2011

2. Team A / Team B Trade

Team A gave up Graham, Earnest TBB RB;Henderson, Devery NOS WR;Steelers, Pittsburgh PIT Def

Team B gave up Barber, Marion CHI RB;Jackson, Steven STL RB

Fri Oct 7 10:47:21 a.m. ET 2011

3. Team A / Team B Trade

Team A gave up Rivers, Philip SDC QB;Hightower, Tim WAS RB;Tomlinson, LaDainian NYJ RB;Burress, Plaxico NYJ WR

Team B gave up Ryan, Matt ATL QB;McFadden, Darren OAK RB;Reece, Marcel OAK RB;Branch, Deion NEP WR

Fri Sep 23 10:02:09 a.m. ET 2011

Do I think Team B might be a little slow? Perhaps. Do I think there is collusion? I don't know. I think all together the trades are strange, but I'd hate to be the commish on this one. For the record, I am neither team, but thought that this might make an interesting conversation beyond collusion.1. What role does the commissioner play? Commish reviews trades for collusion or gross negligence

2. How does your league handle something like this? I would like ask Team B to help me understand their strategy with these moves.

3. Where would you side? Still feels a bit hypothetical so I wouldn't really "side" anywhere.

4. What's the correct protocol here? Team B is looking a bit like a farm team for Team A but I would tread carefully and not assume that obviously.

Team A posted something and it wasn't a nasty response.

 

[mcd]

The only rule it says is that the commish has the right to overturn if there is collusion. But is there collusion? Team B is 0-6. Team A is in first place.

The rule around here is it's not collusion unless one of the owners involved admits it's collusion. That said, Team B has systematically (every other week) traded what looks like his top 3 picks to Team A for backup depth/waiver wire fodder. I'd expect Team B to trade Rivers back to Team A towards the end of the month.

 

[nysportsfan]

Are the two teams owner's married?And, for God's sake. This is the Shark Pool... not the "Evaluate my trade Pool". Can't even get good NFL news on the main page because of all the trade talks. Read, people, read.

I have no problem if this is moved, I just thought it was a bit different than straight collusion. Not that it matters, but I'm not involved in the trade(s) nor do I want it "evaluated." If it's not appropriate, it will be moved. And no, they are not married as far as I know.

 

[footballnerd]

why couldnt they do it all at once? because it looks suspicious?

 

[nysportsfan]

why couldnt they do it all at once? because it looks suspicious?

I'm not even sure it's collusion. But I guess the commish caught wind of it because another owner thinks it is fishy. It is three slightly lopsided trades, but not "obvious" collusion.

 

[habsfan]

why couldnt they do it all at once? because it looks suspicious?

I'm not even sure it's collusion. But I guess the commish caught wind of it because another owner thinks it is fishy. It is three slightly lopsided trades, but not "obvious" collusion.

Probably minor but Team B also has an extra body to deal with in two of the three...

 

[Apple Jack]

Looks like Team B is just bad at ff and somebody in the league has spotted that and is exploiting it.

 

[emge]

As a Shark, these would be exactly the kind of trades I'd be hoping to make with a Fish, so yeah that's why it is fishy, but no collusion, so it is legal. End of story.

 

[nysportsfan]

Looks like Team B is just bad at ff and somebody in the league has spotted that and is exploiting it.

As a Shark, these would be exactly the kind of trades I'd be hoping to make with a Fish, so yeah that's why it is fishy, but no collusion, so it is legal. End of story.

This is what I feel is the case. I think when someone smells blood, it's all over.

 

[HurryUpSundays]

Are the two teams owner's married?And, for God's sake. This is the Shark Pool... not the "Evaluate my trade Pool". Can't even get good NFL news on the main page because of all the trade talks. Read, people, read.

agree... can some one move all these trade threads to the FFA or The Assistant Coach

you guys act like it's the end of the friggin' world to scroll down past a thread that does not interest you. this is a fantasy football forum. the thread title clearly states what the OP's question or topic of interest will be pertaining to, if this sort of talk does not tickle your fancy, rather than whine and bellyache, try just not opening the thread. it really is that simple.

 

[shadyridr]

what does MFL have to do with it?

 

[CalBear]

Does Otis run Team B?

 

[Nate]

It's been tabled before, but we really need a "Is this collusion?" thread, where new/crappy commissioners post trades in their league and everyone else tells them it's not collusion.

 

[footballnerd]

why couldnt they do it all at once? because it looks suspicious?

I'm not even sure it's collusion. But I guess the commish caught wind of it because another owner thinks it is fishy. It is three slightly lopsided trades, but not "obvious" collusion.

if that was one huge trade that would look pretty much like someone was giving away their starters. these guys think they're slick by trying to drain the tank slowly.

 

[emge]

why couldnt they do it all at once? because it looks suspicious?

I'm not even sure it's collusion. But I guess the commish caught wind of it because another owner thinks it is fishy. It is three slightly lopsided trades, but not "obvious" collusion.

if that was one huge trade that would look pretty much like someone was giving away their starters. these guys think they're slick by trying to drain the tank slowly.

giving away their starters? I only see 3 starters there, the other 3 guys are garbage (Reese, Barber, Branch). Ryan is a wash compared to Rivers. But I rather have Rivers.

 

[Apple Jack]

why couldnt they do it all at once? because it looks suspicious?

I'm not even sure it's collusion. But I guess the commish caught wind of it because another owner thinks it is fishy. It is three slightly lopsided trades, but not "obvious" collusion.

if that was one huge trade that would look pretty much like someone was giving away their starters. these guys think they're slick by trying to drain the tank slowly.

If it was one huge trade, the context would be completely different. Each of those players had entirely different values when considering the time stamps on those trades. A lot of people were still high on Tim Hightower going into week 3. Colston hadn't reestablished himself as the go-to WR in NO when the Henderson trade was made. This is all about the players values at the time and perceived values going forward. Not the reality of what their values are now. You sound like you're looking at these trades as if they all happened today.

 

[nysportsfan]

A lot of good points - slow collusion vs immediate benefit. Isn't the former harder to prove?

 

[habsfan]

why couldnt they do it all at once? because it looks suspicious?

I'm not even sure it's collusion. But I guess the commish caught wind of it because another owner thinks it is fishy. It is three slightly lopsided trades, but not "obvious" collusion.

if that was one huge trade that would look pretty much like someone was giving away their starters. these guys think they're slick by trying to drain the tank slowly.

If it was one huge trade, the context would be completely different. Each of those players had entirely different values when considering the time stamps on those trades. A lot of people were still high on Tim Hightower going into week 3. Colston hadn't reestablished himself as the go-to WR in NO when the Henderson trade was made. This is all about the players values at the time and perceived values going forward. Not the reality of what their values are now. You sound like you're looking at these trades as if they all happened today.

Again hypothetical but you'd have them dead to rights if any of these players had their values wane and were traded back...

 

[Warrior]

The only rule it says is that the commish has the right to overturn if there is collusion. But is there collusion? Team B is 0-6. Team A is in first place.

The rule around here is it's not collusion unless one of the owners involved admits it's collusion. That said, Team B has systematically (every other week) traded what looks like his top 3 picks to Team A for backup depth/waiver wire fodder. I'd expect Team B to trade Rivers back to Team A towards the end of the month.

Great league, buddy. Good luck with that one.