Trading during playoffs - dynasty (1 Viewer)

[PatrickT]

**Editing for clarification. I'm not complaining about the trade below. There's no deadline in this league and I guess I thought there was, which is my fault. It just brought up the idea in my head as to whether or not trades should be allowed during playoffs and I want to know what other peoples opinion on this is. The below was just the scenario that sparked the thought in my head.

A trade just happened in my league and while the trade itself isn't earth shattering, it's between a guy not in the playoffs and a guy going into the championships. He'll now have CJ Anderson and gave away Ellington on IR so he would have an RB to start. I am not involved in this trade and I lost in round 1 so I don't have a dog in this hunt. I also have zero suspicions about collution between the two owners. But it seems wrong to me and I can't quite verbalize why, outside of "it opens the door to collusion". And maybe that's enough.

So, the simple question is, would you allow trading during the playoffs in a dynasty league? Why or why not?

(edited for grammar)

 

[Grahamburn]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

 

[TDorBust]

If its allowed then its allowed, personally its good to have a trade deadline at some point before the playoffs but thats a league rule done in the off-season.

 

[steveski]

Yeah I prefer a trade deadline before playoffs for this reason. The trade isn't collusion at all, the trade is good for both sides. But like you, I don't like seeing it happening during the playoffs or especially championship week.

 

[PatrickT]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

No, there is not. This thread exists because I'm asking people their opinion on whether not one should be instituted. That cool with you?

 

[Hu-Tang Clan]

Of course a deadline should be instituted, it's ridiculous to not have one.

 

[PatrickT]

Of course a deadline should be instituted, it's ridiculous to not have one.

Can you expand on that? I agree, but I can't quite pin it down verbally.

 

[Hu-Tang Clan]

Of course a deadline should be instituted, it's ridiculous to not have one.

Can you expand on that? I agree, but I can't quite pin it down verbally.

How about for the exact circumstance you're in right now? You're right that it's not collusion but by not having a deadline you do open yourselves up to collusion down the road potentially. Have a week 10 or 11 deadline and then open up trading again right after your league is finished playing.

 

[mbuehner]

A trade just happened in my league and while the trade itself isn't earth shattering, it's between a guy not in the playoffs and a guy going into the championships. He'll now have CJ Anderson and gave away Ellington on IR so he would have an RB to start. I am not involved in this trade and I lost in round 1 so I don't have a dog in this hunt. I also have zero suspicions about collution between the two owners. But it seems wrong to me and I can't quite verbalize why, outside of "it opens the door to collusion". And maybe that's enough.

So, would you allow trading during the playoffs in a dynasty league? Why or why not?

(edited for grammar)

This is why leagues have rules written down.

 

[wlwiles]

I'm in a 12 team keeper league with no trade deadline. I traded Forte (he couldn't be kept after this year) to the #2 seed who had lost Bradshaw and was trotting out Gerhart/TRich for a WR that I had late round keeper interest in. I was eliminated from playoff contention, and couldn't keep Forte, so we agreed on the trade as they wanted a RB for the playoff push and I wanted a potential late keeper. We don't vote on trades, but I spoke personally (after-the-fact) with 8 of the remaining 10 owners not involved in the trade and nobody had an issue with it. In fact, several other unkeepable players started hitting the trade block by owners that were out of contention and looking ahead at next years keepers.

 

[mquinnjr]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

/thread

 

[PatrickT]

A trade just happened in my league and while the trade itself isn't earth shattering, it's between a guy not in the playoffs and a guy going into the championships. He'll now have CJ Anderson and gave away Ellington on IR so he would have an RB to start. I am not involved in this trade and I lost in round 1 so I don't have a dog in this hunt. I also have zero suspicions about collution between the two owners. But it seems wrong to me and I can't quite verbalize why, outside of "it opens the door to collusion". And maybe that's enough.

So, would you allow trading during the playoffs in a dynasty league? Why or why not?

(edited for grammar)

This is why leagues have rules written down.

The rules are written down. There is purposefully no trade deadline. I don't like that rule so I'm trying to gather opinions on how to best address instituting one for the league.

 

[PatrickT]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

/thread

Sorry I tried to make a discussion thread on a discussion board. Jeez folks, why is this so hard to understand? I'm starting to remember why I left discussion boards years ago.

 

[steveski]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

/thread

Sorry I tried to make a discussion thread on a discussion board. Jeez folks, why is this so hard to understand? I'm starting to remember why I left discussion boards years ago.

I think people were misinterpreting the point of your thread as you complaining about the trade as opposed to discussing whether trade deadlines should exist in dynasty. Maybe people with better reading comprehension will respond.

 

[MIMN]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

/thread

Sorry I tried to make a discussion thread on a discussion board. Jeez folks, why is this so hard to understand? I'm starting to remember why I left discussion boards years ago.

Don't be so sensitive. This is what people do on here. It makes them feel superior.

You are getting feedback. Most people have a trade deadline to avoid possible collusion trades at the end of the year. Same as with the NFL itself. Our is after the last bye week in the NFL. Injuries and such happen and once bye weeks are done everyone should be in position to staff to deal with them. If this is a keeper/dynasty league then it might make sense to keep them open (if you want that) or shut down for playoffs and reopen after the championship.

The transaction that happened could be allowed but the team out of the playoffs really should have gotten a much better deal IMO. Giving them a starting RB in a great offense in the championship game is worth more than Ellington to me. That is why people might be concerned about collusion and why most shut down trades.

 

[comfortably numb]

A trade just happened in my league and while the trade itself isn't earth shattering, it's between a guy not in the playoffs and a guy going into the championships. He'll now have CJ Anderson and gave away Ellington on IR so he would have an RB to start. I am not involved in this trade and I lost in round 1 so I don't have a dog in this hunt. I also have zero suspicions about collution between the two owners. But it seems wrong to me and I can't quite verbalize why, outside of "it opens the door to collusion". And maybe that's enough.

So, would you allow trading during the playoffs in a dynasty league? Why or why not?

(edited for grammar)

Next time just do this.

You lost a lot of people with what started to sound like a veto trade thread.

For me, yes you have a trade deadline.

Same reason every major sport has one.

If the Cardinals could now go trade for Cutler and Forte, what's the point of a regular season? Just have a 32 team tournament starting in Nov.

 

[PatrickT]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

/thread

Sorry I tried to make a discussion thread on a discussion board. Jeez folks, why is this so hard to understand? I'm starting to remember why I left discussion boards years ago.

I think people were misinterpreting the point of your thread as you complaining about the trade as opposed to discussing whether trade deadlines should exist in dynasty. Maybe people with better reading comprehension will respond.

I guess I can see that. I edited the OP.

 

[mquinnjr]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

/thread

Sorry I tried to make a discussion thread on a discussion board. Jeez folks, why is this so hard to understand? I'm starting to remember why I left discussion boards years ago.

I think people were misinterpreting the point of your thread as you complaining about the trade as opposed to discussing whether trade deadlines should exist in dynasty. Maybe people with better reading comprehension will respond.

We don't need to go into a rabbit hole of discussion here. As has been mentioned, if a trade deadline does not exist, one should be enforced the following season. As for this season, the trade should stand absent a rule barring the trade from happening, unless the trade is clearly collusive. I don't see it as such, so trade should stand.

 

[Jersey35]

Bunch of idiots responding to this thread who can't imagine someone asking this question without an axe to grind.

Disregard them.

My dynasty league is in its 15th season and we are one of the few leagues, I think, that has no trade deadline (we also play 2 week series in the playoffs that run through week 17, so bear in mind we are a pretty unique group). We realized a long time ago that trades are fun, so we instituted rules to help encourage them. One of the those changes was the removal of a trade deadline. Our thought process was this:

• More trades = more fun
• Aging vets that are still producing have the highest value to some in desperate need, but can be difficult to move for value in a dynasty league
• Poor teams are best able to leverage that aging talent to improve their team at highest value during the playoffs to playoff teams in dire need
• The potential for overpayment to "buy" a championship during a playoff run causes talent to more quickly be dispersed through the league - encouraging greater parity long term, more success for more teams, and ultimately better owner retention.

Yes, we all had to come to grips with the idea that the landscape could change in a heartbeat during the playoffs, but since we're in it for the long-haul, it all evens out. Here's an example from this year:

My 1st round opponent added Alshon Jeffery and Greg Olsen to significantly improve those positions between game one (week 14) and game two (week 15) of our series. He paid a kings ransom to do so. It generated a ton of buzz in the league. He ended up losing 364 to 361 (cumulative), partially because he benched Harry Douglas (who he would have started) for Jeffery. Now the talent that he gave up to make a run at it is on a weaker team's roster, which will serve to level the playing field even more next season.

 

[steveski]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

/thread

Sorry I tried to make a discussion thread on a discussion board. Jeez folks, why is this so hard to understand? I'm starting to remember why I left discussion boards years ago.

I think people were misinterpreting the point of your thread as you complaining about the trade as opposed to discussing whether trade deadlines should exist in dynasty. Maybe people with better reading comprehension will respond.

We don't need to go into a rabbit hole of discussion here. As has been mentioned, if a trade deadline does not exist, one should be enforced the following season. As for this season, the trade should stand absent a rule barring the trade from happening, unless the trade is clearly collusive. I don't see it as such, so trade should stand.

He's not asking if his trade should stand. He's asking what our opinions are on trade deadlines in dynasty leagues. His story was just an example of why he thinks there should be a trade deadline.

 

[MIMN]

Bunch of idiots responding to this thread who can't imagine someone asking this question without an axe to grind.

Disregard them.

My dynasty league is in its 15th season and we are one of the few leagues, I think, that has no trade deadline (we also play 2 week series in the playoffs that run through week 17, so bear in mind we are a pretty unique group). We realized a long time ago that trades are fun, so we instituted rules to help encourage them. One of the those changes was the removal of a trade deadline. Our thought process was this:

• More trades = more fun
• Aging vets that are still producing have the highest value to some in desperate need, but can be difficult to move for value in a dynasty league
• Poor teams are best able to leverage that aging talent to improve their team at highest value during the playoffs to playoff teams in dire need
• The potential for overpayment to "buy" a championship during a playoff run causes talent to more quickly be dispersed through the league - encouraging greater parity long term, more success for more teams, and ultimately better owner retention.

Yes, we all had to come to grips with the idea that the landscape could change in a heartbeat during the playoffs, but since we're in it for the long-haul, it all evens out. Here's an example from this year:

My 1st round opponent added Alshon Jeffery and Greg Olsen to significantly improve those positions between game one (week 14) and game two (week 15) of our series. He paid a kings ransom to do so. It generated a ton of buzz in the league. He ended up losing 364 to 361 (cumulative), partially because he benched Harry Douglas (who he would have started) for Jeffery. Now the talent that he gave up to make a run at it is on a weaker team's roster, which will serve to level the playing field even more next season.

I really like the idea of a 2 week total points set up here. It could cause exactly what you saw happen. Coaching/GM decisions are the a big part of FFB and this should emphasize them.

 

[Jersey35]

Bunch of idiots responding to this thread who can't imagine someone asking this question without an axe to grind.

Disregard them.

My dynasty league is in its 15th season and we are one of the few leagues, I think, that has no trade deadline (we also play 2 week series in the playoffs that run through week 17, so bear in mind we are a pretty unique group). We realized a long time ago that trades are fun, so we instituted rules to help encourage them. One of the those changes was the removal of a trade deadline. Our thought process was this:

• More trades = more fun
• Aging vets that are still producing have the highest value to some in desperate need, but can be difficult to move for value in a dynasty league
• Poor teams are best able to leverage that aging talent to improve their team at highest value during the playoffs to playoff teams in dire need
• The potential for overpayment to "buy" a championship during a playoff run causes talent to more quickly be dispersed through the league - encouraging greater parity long term, more success for more teams, and ultimately better owner retention.

Yes, we all had to come to grips with the idea that the landscape could change in a heartbeat during the playoffs, but since we're in it for the long-haul, it all evens out. Here's an example from this year:

My 1st round opponent added Alshon Jeffery and Greg Olsen to significantly improve those positions between game one (week 14) and game two (week 15) of our series. He paid a kings ransom to do so. It generated a ton of buzz in the league. He ended up losing 364 to 361 (cumulative), partially because he benched Harry Douglas (who he would have started) for Jeffery. Now the talent that he gave up to make a run at it is on a weaker team's roster, which will serve to level the playing field even more next season.

I really like the idea of a 2 week total points set up here. It could cause exactly what you saw happen. Coaching/GM decisions are the a big part of FFB and this should emphasize them.

Not to hijack the thread, but our decision to switch to 2 week series running weeks 14/15 and 16/17 was the absolute most amazing rule change we've ever made (and we have some other unique rules too). The heightened drama in the playoffs is incredible and because it's a 2 week series (and we're dynasty) and the championship runs into week 17 it really encourages an owner to consider roster depth, because you may have top players resting and make very difficult lineup decisions and adjustments after the first game.

 

[Winning IS Everything]

Our dynasty league started with a trade deadline of week 10. We have moved it to Week 11, and many want to move it to week 12. I would be ok with week 12 or maybe 13, but not any further than that. That way, no Marshawn Lynch for Christine Michael type trades happen in the playoffs..........

 

[mbuehner]

A trade just happened in my league and while the trade itself isn't earth shattering, it's between a guy not in the playoffs and a guy going into the championships. He'll now have CJ Anderson and gave away Ellington on IR so he would have an RB to start. I am not involved in this trade and I lost in round 1 so I don't have a dog in this hunt. I also have zero suspicions about collution between the two owners. But it seems wrong to me and I can't quite verbalize why, outside of "it opens the door to collusion". And maybe that's enough.

So, would you allow trading during the playoffs in a dynasty league? Why or why not?

(edited for grammar)

This is why leagues have rules written down.

The rules are written down. There is purposefully no trade deadline. I don't like that rule so I'm trying to gather opinions on how to best address instituting one for the league.

Gotcha. In my opinion, unless everyone is into a really exotic league, you should certainly have a trade deadline just like all real sports do. Buying a championship in the final week might be fun for some people of a transactional mindset, but I think most of us like the idea of playing GM and grooming talent, particularly in a dynasty league. No trade deadlines seems more like commodity trading to me, which im not interested in personally.

 

[Tool]

You need a trade deadline. i prefer something around week 8 but each league is different.

 

[Grahamburn]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

No, there is not. This thread exists because I'm asking people their opinion on whether not one should be instituted. That cool with you?

Your league needs a trade deadline.

 

[biju]

You either need to have a trade deadline or I would suggest that teams not in contention (or only in contention) can trade. But, you need to have a trade deadline.

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

The rules are written down. There is purposefully no trade deadline. I don't like that rule so I'm trying to gather opinions on how to best address instituting one for the league.

I would say you first need to understand why your league doesn't have one in the first place (as I assume from your use of the word "purposefully" that it wasn't accidentally omitted to start with).

If a lot of the original owners are still in the league, you're most likely going to have an issue going straight to a hard-and-fast deadline as exists in most redraft leagues, and you will probably need to start with some sort of half-measure. (Personally, I don't like applying redraft trade rules to dynasty leagues anyway, as I believe the latter demands a little more flexibility given the non-perishable nature of each team's assets, but YMMV.)

My suggestion would be something like this: Have an "open" trading period that runs through the end of Week 10 or 11, then a "restricted" period that runs from then until 24 hours before kickoff of the first NFL game of the first league playoff week. During the restricted period, any trade between teams mathematically eliminated from the playoffs is OK. Any trade between teams that have clinched playoff spots is OK (perhaps with some slight additional oversight?). However, trading between teams out of contention and playoff teams is either disallowed, or subject to additional requirements (such as the non-contending team must front the following season's entry fee before making the trade).

If all you're trying to do is eliminate possible collusion between teams in contention and out of contention, this will do fine, and shouldn't raise too much ire from other owners.

 

[MIMN]

LOL. CJ Anderson's workload to be monitored... See what can happen?

I still say you can either have a deadline or not. Whichever you want.

 

[Jersey35]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

No, there is not. This thread exists because I'm asking people their opinion on whether not one should be instituted. That cool with you?

Your league needs a trade deadline.

I don't want this to come off confrontational, but I don't understand how you can determine that someone else's league needs a trade deadline. That's sort of t he beauty of being able to join and run and have ownership in a league: the ability to choose, create or take part in the league that seems most fun for each participant.

If the majority of his league loves the idea of having no trade deadline, and would consider leaving the league if one were added, then the league definitely does not need a trade deadline.

A previous poster said it best: you need to know why your league has no deadline to even begin discussing whether to add one.

 

[wlwiles]

You either need to have a trade deadline or I would suggest that teams not in contention (or only in contention) can trade. But, you need to have a trade deadline.

You don't necessarily have to have a trade deadline, as other posters have mentioned how no deadline works fine in their leagues. If it were a redraft then yes, I'd say you do need one, but since it's dynasty you don't have to have one. What you need is to determine whether or not your league truly wants to have one or not, and if not then are there any other ancillary rules (playoff teams can only trade with each other after X date for example).

 

[Tool]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

No, there is not. This thread exists because I'm asking people their opinion on whether not one should be instituted. That cool with you?

Your league needs a trade deadline.

I don't want this to come off confrontational, but I don't understand how you can determine that someone else's league needs a trade deadline. That's sort of t he beauty of being able to join and run and have ownership in a league: the ability to choose, create or take part in the league that seems most fun for each participant.

If the majority of his league loves the idea of having no trade deadline, and would consider leaving the league if one were added, then the league definitely does not need a trade deadline.

A previous poster said it best: you need to know why your league has no deadline to even begin discussing whether to add one.

Every dynasty league needs a trade deadline to be a decent league. It just doesn't work without one.

 

[Captain Hook]

Of course a deadline should be instituted, it's ridiculous to not have one.

+1

 

[SCT]

Fantasy is mostly luck. Why limit the few things we can control?

 

[Jeremy]

Bunch of idiots responding to this thread who can't imagine someone asking this question without an axe to grind.

Disregard them.

My dynasty league is in its 15th season and we are one of the few leagues, I think, that has no trade deadline (we also play 2 week series in the playoffs that run through week 17, so bear in mind we are a pretty unique group). We realized a long time ago that trades are fun, so we instituted rules to help encourage them. One of the those changes was the removal of a trade deadline. Our thought process was this:

• More trades = more fun
• Aging vets that are still producing have the highest value to some in desperate need, but can be difficult to move for value in a dynasty league
• Poor teams are best able to leverage that aging talent to improve their team at highest value during the playoffs to playoff teams in dire need
• The potential for overpayment to "buy" a championship during a playoff run causes talent to more quickly be dispersed through the league - encouraging greater parity long term, more success for more teams, and ultimately better owner retention.

Yes, we all had to come to grips with the idea that the landscape could change in a heartbeat during the playoffs, but since we're in it for the long-haul, it all evens out. Here's an example from this year:

My 1st round opponent added Alshon Jeffery and Greg Olsen to significantly improve those positions between game one (week 14) and game two (week 15) of our series. He paid a kings ransom to do so. It generated a ton of buzz in the league. He ended up losing 364 to 361 (cumulative), partially because he benched Harry Douglas (who he would have started) for Jeffery. Now the talent that he gave up to make a run at it is on a weaker team's roster, which will serve to level the playing field even more next season.

Exactly this. The lack of a trade deadline in dynasty provides another level of intrigue and strategy, and it helps poorer teams in the rebuilding process. If you don't like that your opponent pulled off a deal for his playoff push, then maybe you should have been the one to make the offer. He was willing to take a risk and you weren't.

A lot of times it blows in your face. I paid a 1st for Greg Jennings at the end of his time in Green Bay, he layed an egg in my playoffs, I lost, and of course he never amounted to much in MN. Ended up trading him for a lot less than I paid.

Trading is a HUGE part of the fun in dynasty and I wouldn't favor any rule that suppresses it.

 

[PatrickT]

Thanks to everyone for the opinions, sorry for the poorly worded question. Good points on both sides.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Basically if you want a trade deadline you are afraid of losing to someone who wants it more than you do.

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

Basically if you want a trade deadline you are afraid of losing to someone who wants it more than you do.

I guess what we can surmise from this statement is that none of the owners of the four major pro sports really want it all that badly.

 

[Warhogs]

There was a similar thread like this a couple years ago. Arguments were made for both sides. Some don't like the idea of a team being able to load up for the championship game but playoff teams may also be willing to overpay in the short term which helps the non playoff teams improve a bit more quickly. I can see both sides and don't really have a strong opinion either way.

 

[renesauz]

A trade just happened in my league and while the trade itself isn't earth shattering, it's between a guy not in the playoffs and a guy going into the championships. He'll now have CJ Anderson and gave away Ellington on IR so he would have an RB to start. I am not involved in this trade and I lost in round 1 so I don't have a dog in this hunt. I also have zero suspicions about collution between the two owners. But it seems wrong to me and I can't quite verbalize why, outside of "it opens the door to collusion". And maybe that's enough.

So, would you allow trading during the playoffs in a dynasty league? Why or why not?

(edited for grammar)

This is why leagues have rules written down.

The rules are written down. There is purposefully no trade deadline. I don't like that rule so I'm trying to gather opinions on how to best address instituting one for the league.

Gotcha. In my opinion, unless everyone is into a really exotic league, you should certainly have a trade deadline just like all real sports do. Buying a championship in the final week might be fun for some people of a transactional mindset, but I think most of us like the idea of playing GM and grooming talent, particularly in a dynasty league. No trade deadlines seems more like commodity trading to me, which im not interested in personally.

This. I wouldn't participate in a league that allowed trading through the playoffs

 

[thriftyrocker]

Basically if you want a trade deadline you are afraid of losing to someone who wants it more than you do.

I guess what we can surmise from this statement is that none of the owners of the four major pro sports really want it all that badly.

The trade deadline exists in major pro sports for financial reasons that do not typically apply to fantasy football.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Every dynasty league needs a trade deadline to be a decent league. It just doesn't work without one.

It does. I promise it does.

 

[Adam Harstad]

So, the simple question is, would you allow trading during the playoffs in a dynasty league? Why or why not?

I'm a big proponent of doing away with trade deadlines in dynasty leagues. If you're a subscriber, I wrote about it here. If you're not a subscriber, here are the highlights, many of which have already been mentioned:

1. Allowing trades during the playoffs improves parity and gives bad teams a chance to improve.

2. Allowing trades during the playoffs makes it so that random injuries play less of a role in deciding championships.

3. Allowing trades during the playoffs rewards teams with enough depth that they can afford to trade in the first place.

If the Julio Jones owner wants to trade him for Jordy Nelson for the championship game, shouldn't he be able to? And isn't that latter roster (the one with Jordy in the starting lineup) more indicative of his team's overall quality than the former (the one with Julio on the bench)? And isn't the Jordy Nelson owner's team (which is presumably not in the championship) now better for having Julio, instead? I know playoff trades can feel wrong, but I think they reward a lot of things that we all want to see rewarded in fantasy. We want mechanisms to promote parity. We want injuries to play a smaller role in outcomes. We want depth to be rewarded. Removing the trade deadline does these things.

Of course, allowing trades during the playoffs opens the door to potential abuses. Someone could decide he's in his last season, dump all of his future assets for a present boost, then bail after the championship game. Of course, they could just as easily do that in week 11 if you had a week 12 deadline. Regardless, I find the best way to stave off that is the same way we stave off owners selling all their future 1st rounders and then bailing- require owners who trade after a certain date to pay next year's league dues.

 

[Jersey35]

Is there a trade deadline? If the answer is "no" then this thread shouldn't exist.

No, there is not. This thread exists because I'm asking people their opinion on whether not one should be instituted. That cool with you?

Your league needs a trade deadline.

I don't want this to come off confrontational, but I don't understand how you can determine that someone else's league needs a trade deadline. That's sort of t he beauty of being able to join and run and have ownership in a league: the ability to choose, create or take part in the league that seems most fun for each participant.

If the majority of his league loves the idea of having no trade deadline, and would consider leaving the league if one were added, then the league definitely does not need a trade deadline.

A previous poster said it best: you need to know why your league has no deadline to even begin discussing whether to add one.

Every dynasty league needs a trade deadline to be a decent league. It just doesn't work without one.

it absolutely works. Without question.

 

[Jeremy]

You can't "buy a championship". At best you can buy a better chance of winning one at the cost of mortgaging a part of your future. It's not unlike an NFL team restructuring contracts to create cap space so they can afford a free agent. Yes, you can do that for a better chance to win now, but you're going to pay for that down the road.

 

[Adam Harstad]

You can't "buy a championship". At best you can buy a better chance of winning one at the cost of mortgaging a part of your future. It's not unlike an NFL team restructuring contracts to create cap space so they can afford a free agent. Yes, you can do that for a better chance to win now, but you're going to pay for that down the road.

Right on. I think people dramatically overrate the effectiveness of trying to "buy" a championship, anyway. I went back last year and calculated presumed championship odds for various teams in my leagues based on the all-play records of all the teams in the playoff field at the time the playoff starts, (which of course assumes that team strength is comparable in the playoffs to what it was in the regular season, which isn't always the case, but we're going for an approximation so I'm happy to handwave that). If you're interested, the article is available here, and since it's last year's content, I believe it should be accessible whether you're a FBGs subscriber or not.

Anyway, the takeaway I had was that you could take the best team in the league, give him a first-round bye, and he'd still probably only be a 1-in-3 shot to win the title. I calculated the same for some of the best teams I had ever seen in my decade and a half of fantasy football, a team with an 84% all-play winning percentage, a team that outscored 2nd place by almost as much as the 2nd-place team outscored the 2nd-to-last place team, and even with the bye they were barely breaking a 50% chance at the title. So let's assume that the best team in the league decided he wanted to "buy" a title, and he somehow managed to make enough trades to turn himself from "the best team in the league" into "the best team in league history". All of those moves would improve his playoff odds by maybe 15-20%. We're talking about the equivalent of adding Jamaal Charles and Calvin Johnson and maybe even Drew Brees the day before the title game. That kind of haul improves your odds by 15-20%.

Fantasy is just noisy and messy. When you trade for a guy, there are 4 possible outcomes.

1. You win the title / you would have won even without the trade.

2. You lose the title / you would have lost even without the trade.

3. You win the title / you would have lost without the trade.

4. You lose the title / you would have won without the trade.

No matter what, scenarios 1 and 2 are by far the most common outcomes. Scenario 3 is possible... but people underrate the degree to which scenario 4 is possible, too. I've seen plenty of situations where playoff trades backfired. I saw a guy trade a 2nd rounder for a defense with a great matchup, only for the move to cost him 10 points as his regular defense blew up, (though, in fairness, that guy fell in category 2- he would have lost regardless of which defense he started).

In my opinion, the only real way to buy a championship is to call your opponent before the game and pay him money not to set a lineup.