Trading Rules with players to be named later involved? (1 Viewer)

[Hurl Bruce]

I am in a keeper league that allows trading all the way up to the playoffs. Some owners are entertaining the notion of making trades for players to be named later.

Team A trades Gronk to Team B for a player to be named later. Should the caliber of player/draft pick depend on how well Gronk does? How well the overall team does?

Does anyone do this in their league and what are the logistics for these types of deals?

I am interested in ideas on how this could work...or if this is just a nightmare waiting to happen.

TIA.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

No way. Nightmare waiting to happen. I've been in some leagues that allow the trading of conditional rookie draft picks, but that takes so much manual tracking and causes a headache as well, so most of my league do not allow that anymore either.

 

[DoubleG]

We do it. It's a lot of fun and it helps protect teams from injury.

It's not that hard to track. Just make sure the specifics are clear and an email sent to the commish with those specifics approved by both teams. Just made a similar deal for Frank Gore - the draft pick is 2nd round if he average 15 or more touches (carries + receptions) from the week I made the trade until the final week of the regular season. We just add up his touches and divide by the number of touches. 15+, dude gets a 2nd round pick. <15, it's a 3rd rounder instead.

Basically, I requested this condition after making a non-conditional trade for McGahee last season, then getting screwed, as he got hurt a week after the trade.

ETA: The conditional trades really become more prevalent as teams make last-minute trades for the playoff run. It is more costly if you lose a guy for 3-4 weeks, when you really only traded for him for a 4-5 week window. You lose a guy for 3-4 weeks over a 13 or 14 game regular season, not nearly as big a deal.

 

[Mario Kart]

If trading players... a player needs to be traded from both teams right away other wise it is "renting" a player. Who is to say what the players "value" will be later down the road? That is unfair to the league.

Scummiest thing that could happen in any fantasy league... renting of players. Don't do it, don't allow it.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

We do it. It's a lot of fun and it helps protect teams from injury.

It's not that hard to track. Just make sure the specifics are clear and an email sent to the commish with those specifics approved by both teams. Just made a similar deal for Frank Gore - the draft pick is 2nd round if he average 15 or more touches (carries + receptions) from the week I made the trade until the final week of the regular season. We just add up his touches and divide by the number of touches. 15+, dude gets a 2nd round pick. <15, it's a 3rd rounder instead.

Basically, I requested this condition after making a non-conditional trade for McGahee last season, then getting screwed, as he got hurt a week after the trade.

ETA: The conditional trades really become more prevalent as teams make last-minute trades for the playoff run. It is more costly if you lose a guy for 3-4 weeks, when you really only traded for him for a 4-5 week window. You lose a guy for 3-4 weeks over a 13 or 14 game regular season, not nearly as big a deal.

This is all true, and if you want to keep track of the draft picks, very viable.But the OP isn't asking about conditional draft pick trades.

He's asking about conditional player trades. Which is ridiculous.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

No way.

 

[GregR]

We do it. It's a lot of fun and it helps protect teams from injury.

It's not that hard to track. Just make sure the specifics are clear and an email sent to the commish with those specifics approved by both teams. Just made a similar deal for Frank Gore - the draft pick is 2nd round if he average 15 or more touches (carries + receptions) from the week I made the trade until the final week of the regular season. We just add up his touches and divide by the number of touches. 15+, dude gets a 2nd round pick. <15, it's a 3rd rounder instead.

Basically, I requested this condition after making a non-conditional trade for McGahee last season, then getting screwed, as he got hurt a week after the trade.

ETA: The conditional trades really become more prevalent as teams make last-minute trades for the playoff run. It is more costly if you lose a guy for 3-4 weeks, when you really only traded for him for a 4-5 week window. You lose a guy for 3-4 weeks over a 13 or 14 game regular season, not nearly as big a deal.

This is all true, and if you want to keep track of the draft picks, very viable.But the OP isn't asking about conditional draft pick trades.

He's asking about conditional player trades. Which is ridiculous.

Worse, he's asking about conditional player trades where the conditions are not defined at the time of the trade.

I have no clue how baseball allows these things. The player who is traded can actually be the PTBNL! There are 4 players in MLB history who were traded to another team for a PTBNL, and then after being used by the new team, became the PTBNL and were sent back to their own team.

Talk about creating a mechanism for cheating. Unbelievable.

We do allow conditional trades but only when the condition is around a draft pick, and it has to be clearly stated exactly how it is to be determined. Any players who trade teams must do so in a single, immediate transaction at the time the trade is executed.

 

[Hurl Bruce]

Does it make a difference is parameters are in place at the time of the deal? Let's say, if I make the championship game, you get player A. If I don't, you get player B.

I'm not sure of what other metrics to use. Snaps? Touches? PPG? Games played?

I don't think that I am in favor of it...but some owners are asking how this is any different than trading Player A for draft pick X in next year's draft. Is that any different? I think so because each owner is getting defined value for the deal at the time of the deal. Deals with PTBNL seem like it's taking the risk out of trading.

 

[Deranged Hermit]

If we're talking about conditional draft picks, thats easy enough. I'm ok with that. Conditional players? No way.

 

[Mario Kart]

Does it make a difference is parameters are in place at the time of the deal? Let's say, if I make the championship game, you get player A. If I don't, you get player B.

I'm not sure of what other metrics to use. Snaps? Touches? PPG? Games played?

I don't think that I am in favor of it...but some owners are asking how this is any different than trading Player A for draft pick X in next year's draft. Is that any different? I think so because each owner is getting defined value for the deal at the time of the deal. Deals with PTBNL seem like it's taking the risk out of trading.

No, you are renting a player with little to no loss to you at the time of the trade. That is a blatant cheating.

If this trade is for you, you're cheating. If this trade has been brought up by someone else, they are looking to cheat.

Simple answer... no league should allow the renting of players. [/thread]

 

[BigSteelThrill]

If we're talking about conditional draft picks, thats easy enough. I'm ok with that. Conditional players? No way.

 

[GregR]

...
I don't think that I am in favor of it...but some owners are asking how this is any different than trading Player A for draft pick X in next year's draft. Is that any different? I think so because each owner is getting defined value for the deal at the time of the deal. Deals with PTBNL seem like it's taking the risk out of trading.

Both types of trades defer something of value until later for something of value now, yes. So they are right that something about them is similar. But what they have in common isn't the reason for why you should avoid them.

Allowing the transfer of a player to be deferred makes it very easy for owners to cheat. With such rules in place, colluding owners can carry out in one trade an unethically motivated transaction, that otherwise would take multiple trades. Multiple trades tend to draw more scrutiny, are more difficult to pull off without injecting some other change in value the cheating owners didn't wish, and make it easier to spot the unethical behavior as it gets more difficult to disguise them as regular trades.

An example would be... you and I agree before the draft that you'll draft a good backup TE and I'll draft a good backup defense that we'll share so we both get an above average bye week filler at each position. With normal trade rules we're pretty much at the whim of scheduling whether our starters will have byes where we can exchange the backup TE and defense in a single trade. In order for us to cheat and work together, we might have to do two trades to disguise that really we are working collectively to share our backups. Now we have to disguise both of those trades with additional players, and both trades have to pass the sniff test. It might be that we don't even want to have to transfer the other players we'll have to include now so we don't even carry out our roster sharing.

Now change the rules to where I can give you the defense this week and you don't have to give me the TE until whenever you want. The new rule makes it very simple for people to loan and share players with each other since we don't have to restrict the trade to an immediate transaction. That's one example, you could also have teams who are teaming up by sharing starters against tough fantasy opponents, or that are working to stack opponents to hurt people in contention for playoff spots, etc.

A future draft pick does not score fantasy points during the current season, so very useful for people trying to unethically work together this season. So even though it is similar in that both types of trades are getting something later for something now... the fact that draft pick trades don't enable the most common types of cheating to happen as easily is a key difference.

 

[Hurl Bruce]

The biggest problem with trading a player to be named later is that the team that is trading him later gets to use him in the interim.

 

[Hurl Bruce]

So some owners are asking how is trading a player for a future pick different than trading a player in the offseason for a player gained in the current season?

I trade a future pick for Gronk. I get to keep everyone else on my roster to go along with Gronk.

I trade a PTBNL for Gronk. Team B gets AJ Green in the off season from me.

Both instances let me play Gronk and Green in the current season.

Why is the second scenario bad and first not?

 

[ConnSKINS26]

So some owners are asking how is trading a player for a future pick different than trading a player in the offseason for a player gained in the current season?

I trade a future pick for Gronk. I get to keep everyone else on my roster to go along with Gronk.

I trade a PTBNL for Gronk. Team B gets AJ Green in the off season from me.

Both instances let me play Gronk and Green in the current season.

Why is the second scenario bad and first not?

Because in the first scenario that 1st has tangible, actual value that can be re-traded for another player if the owner desires.

In the second scenario, you've got nothing to show for your trade until the offseason. It's the definition of renting out a player.

 

[ratbast]

Think about it for a minute...no can do. take it at an extreme and get 3 players in week 8 for your championship and the trade partner gets to pick 3 off your team next year. ridiculous

 

[Sarnoff]

I have no clue how baseball allows these things.

It only really ever happens in baseball when the guy being traded for the PTBNL is the worst player on the roster, but still rosterable (above minor league replacement).

Think about it in FF, though, and it doesn't make much sense.

I'd accept a ton of players for PTBNLs, then I'd just trade back kickers when the bill came due.

 

[Sweet Love]

We do it. It's a lot of fun and it helps protect teams from injury.

It's not that hard to track. Just make sure the specifics are clear and an email sent to the commish with those specifics approved by both teams. Just made a similar deal for Frank Gore - the draft pick is 2nd round if he average 15 or more touches (carries + receptions) from the week I made the trade until the final week of the regular season. We just add up his touches and divide by the number of touches. 15+, dude gets a 2nd round pick. <15, it's a 3rd rounder instead.

Basically, I requested this condition after making a non-conditional trade for McGahee last season, then getting screwed, as he got hurt a week after the trade.

ETA: The conditional trades really become more prevalent as teams make last-minute trades for the playoff run. It is more costly if you lose a guy for 3-4 weeks, when you really only traded for him for a 4-5 week window. You lose a guy for 3-4 weeks over a 13 or 14 game regular season, not nearly as big a deal.

This is all true, and if you want to keep track of the draft picks, very viable.But the OP isn't asking about conditional draft pick trades.

He's asking about conditional player trades. Which is ridiculous.

Exactly...I get the conditional pick thing (though I can see that being a pain for the commishes to worry about if they occur in volume), but the player to be named later opens a can of worms. For example, what if you have a list of players to be named later (say AJ Green and Marshawn Lynch for Gronk), and the owner who got Gronk now gets the benefit of playing with both Gronk and Green/Lynch for a determined period? It is unfair to the league. Also, what happens if the owner by mistake trades/drops the players to be named later (less likely, but possible) because they forgot and now the two cannot agree to a replacement? It just opens a can of worms that really has no benefit on the front-end.

 

[Flying Elvis]

I read your post even though the title alone was enough for me to say it's a terrible idea.

 

[ebsteelers]

asking for trouble

 

[RUSF18]

I have no clue how baseball allows these things.

It only really ever happens in baseball when the guy being traded for the PTBNL is the worst player on the roster, but still rosterable (above minor league replacement).

Think about it in FF, though, and it doesn't make much sense.

I'd accept a ton of players for PTBNLs, then I'd just trade back kickers when the bill came due.

In baseball, it actually happens by the two teams coming up with an agreed-upon list of players that could be chosen to be the PTBNL at the later time.

 

[Adam Harstad]

We do it. It's a lot of fun and it helps protect teams from injury.

It's not that hard to track. Just make sure the specifics are clear and an email sent to the commish with those specifics approved by both teams. Just made a similar deal for Frank Gore - the draft pick is 2nd round if he average 15 or more touches (carries + receptions) from the week I made the trade until the final week of the regular season. We just add up his touches and divide by the number of touches. 15+, dude gets a 2nd round pick. <15, it's a 3rd rounder instead.

Basically, I requested this condition after making a non-conditional trade for McGahee last season, then getting screwed, as he got hurt a week after the trade.

ETA: The conditional trades really become more prevalent as teams make last-minute trades for the playoff run. It is more costly if you lose a guy for 3-4 weeks, when you really only traded for him for a 4-5 week window. You lose a guy for 3-4 weeks over a 13 or 14 game regular season, not nearly as big a deal.

This is all true, and if you want to keep track of the draft picks, very viable.But the OP isn't asking about conditional draft pick trades.

He's asking about conditional player trades. Which is ridiculous.

Worse, he's asking about conditional player trades where the conditions are not defined at the time of the trade.

I have no clue how baseball allows these things. The player who is traded can actually be the PTBNL! There are 4 players in MLB history who were traded to another team for a PTBNL, and then after being used by the new team, became the PTBNL and were sent back to their own team.

Talk about creating a mechanism for cheating. Unbelievable.

We do allow conditional trades but only when the condition is around a draft pick, and it has to be clearly stated exactly how it is to be determined. Any players who trade teams must do so in a single, immediate transaction at the time the trade is executed.

I actually could see allowing PTBNL trades. If the only problem is that conditions are not defined at the time of the trade, that's a problem that is easily solved.

Here's an example of how it might work in a league with 30-man rosters:

Team A trades: Tony Gonzalez

Team B trades: PTBNL (due June 1st, 24/30 protected)

Mechanism: on June 1st, Team B declares 24 players to be "off-limits". Team A then takes his selection of any of the remaining 6 unprotected players.

If you wanted to make it conditional, that would be easily done. Team B could trade a PTBNL that was 27/30 protected, which drops to 25/30 protected if he makes the championship game and 23/30 protected if he wins a championship. Make it so PTBNLs can be transferred between teams (Team A trades for a 24/30 protected PTBNL from Team B, then turns around and trades the rights to that 24/30 protected PTBNL to Team C for a rookie 2nd), and that defuses the "actual, tangible asset" objection. If you're worried about mid-season shenanigans (such as backup-sharing), then have the league declare an official PTBNL Day, and all PTBNL transactions will always process on that day. Have it the same day as the rookie draft, for instance, and process all of the PTBNL transactions before the draft kicks off. Suddenly, PTBNL trades become functionally identical to trading for future picks.

Honestly, the biggest argument against it is that it's a bit of a logistical nightmare, and I'd hate to have to manage it. Still, that doesn't mean it can't be managed. Some see obstacles; I see opportunities.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

So some owners are asking how is trading a player for a future pick different than trading a player in the offseason for a player gained in the current season?

I trade a future pick for Gronk. I get to keep everyone else on my roster to go along with Gronk.

I trade a PTBNL for Gronk. Team B gets AJ Green in the off season from me.

Both instances let me play Gronk and Green in the current season.

Why is the second scenario bad and first not?

The pick is an immediate asset that can be used immediately in another deal for one thing.

The "player to be named later", in your examaple creates too much league imbalance and opens up the door to collusion. If a team is out of the playoffs entirely, he can make a lateral move (i.e. Gronk for AJ Green), while also allowing his buddy to use both players for his playoff run.

It's just too easy for Team B to say "what the heck, my season is over anyway yo keep both players now and send me Green in the offseason".

 

[FUBAR]

If the league wants to allow trading of a player for PTBNL, then fine. Just make sure the conditions are clear and the rule in place up front. This should be one of the "proactively allowed" rules as opposed to the "it's not against the rules, therefore it's ok" type situations.

With the pick, as long as the specifics are clear, I'm good with it and have done it, a long time ago.

 

[FUBAR]

So some owners are asking how is trading a player for a future pick different than trading a player in the offseason for a player gained in the current season?

I trade a future pick for Gronk. I get to keep everyone else on my roster to go along with Gronk.

I trade a PTBNL for Gronk. Team B gets AJ Green in the off season from me.

Both instances let me play Gronk and Green in the current season.

Why is the second scenario bad and first not?

The pick is an immediate asset that can be used immediately in another deal for one thing.

The "player to be named later", in your examaple creates too much league imbalance and opens up the door to collusion. If a team is out of the playoffs entirely, he can make a lateral move (i.e. Gronk for AJ Green), while also allowing his buddy to use both players for his playoff run.

It's just too easy for Team B to say "what the heck, my season is over anyway yo keep both players now and send me Green in the offseason".

so can the player as long as it's clear who it is, or what specifically will decide who it is.

If I deal AJ Green "later" for Gronk now, there's no reason team B couldn't trade "Late AJ Green" to another team for a player/pick.

I don't think I'd vote to allow the PTBNL, but not for the logic you're applying in bold.

 

[Shutout]

The biggest problem with trading a player to be named later is that the team that is trading him later gets to use him in the interim.

Yeah. It is really no different than when you try that on MFL software and it won't allow it (I play Gonzo on Thursday, get my points and then trade him for Stevie johnson and then stick Stevie in my lineup the same week....software says "NOPE").