Updating FFL Trade Rules (1 Viewer)

[u999spf]

I commish a number of leagues and they are all run pretty well for the most part, but every year I look to tweak or change rules or close loop holes that come up to improve these leagues. The only real hot button issues that ever pops up are trade issues.

You know the ones I am talking about. Where 80% of the league complains that 'Team X' fleeced, robbed, hood-winked, 'Team Y'. Everyone wants the trade reversed, people threaten to quit, sell off their team in retaliation, etc...

I am a firm believer in if you pay your money to manage your team, you can manage your team any way you want, provided that you are trying to win. So the only real trade rules I have are no cheating or collusion (which is very hard to prove anyway) and no player borrowing or loaning (if you trade a player, you can't trade him back to the original owner until 4 weeks have passed.)

These 2 rules + the trading deadline are the only rules we have for trades so this leaves open the possibility that one owner can take advantage of another owner in a trade and if/when this happens, is usually when all hell breaks loose. We have tried committee reviews, outside arbitrators and league wide votes but these really open a whole other bunch of issues because everyone values players differently. Who am I to tell someone how to run their team? You don't know 100% who gets the better end of a deal. What if a trade of Derek Anderson for Steven Jackson went through in week2 or 3 of last season. Such a trade would have sent almost any league into a uproar but looking back at season's end, the DA team was probably in the playoffs and the SJ team was not. And as commissioner, you 'saved the league' or protected Owner X from himself, because he doesn't know any better, by not allowing this trade.

So I am looking to add some other trade guidelines such as ....

-Trades have to be within 1 player. No 3 for 1 or 4 for 1 deals. (This would be a minor one, in an effort to keep things equal, by at least adding in throw in players) Maybe this should include something like players must be current starters to count as equal players, - This needs more thought.

- I was also thinking about possibly using FBGs' Trade Dominator somehow. Maybe, you load up the teams and the resulting trade has to be within some number range like 20% difference. This tool seems to be updated each week for waiver wire guys and 200 players moving forward so I think this may be a possibility. Does anyone use this tool to settle trade disputes? If so how?....

Any other ideas out there?

 

[kbleck]

So this has been a problem since the inception of FF.

In my league I commish in we had teams that would have fire sales the week before the trade deadline for future draft picks. We have a 2 player keeper league and those teams out of the playoff hunt sold off their non keepers to other teams for draft picks the following year.

There was a ton of uproar especially from those teams that had a solid lineup and didnt need to give up picks. But the end conclusion is that you have to let people run their franchises the way they want. If someone is stupid enough to make a trade then you have to give the other guy props for making the offer.

I have seen so many threads about bad trades, but most of them are from owners that didnt do the fleecing

So to answer your question regarding value of players, I dont think there is an answer exept for maybe creating some sort of player ranking like they do for trading draft picks during the NFL Draft. Some sort of grading scale for every player in the NFL based on a ton of criteria would give you a value and then you could set a rule like all trades must be within 5% of those rankings.

The rankings would have to be pretty extensive including scores for injury history, repeat good performances year in year out, character issues, and Franchise information (ie was he traded). If someone came out with that type of ranking system that everyone used then that could be the answer.

Now if only I could make some money off that

 

[Pickle Rody]

No need to tweak something that works.

If someone wants out, tell them to go start their own league with their own set of trading rules that they will be happy with. Otherwise, shut your mouth. I can't stand when someone complains about what they think is an unfair trade. They are just jealous that they did not think of it first.

Here's another option: institute a Cry Baby Award. Give this award to the idiot who cries the most about lopsided trades throughout the year. This guy is not hard to find. Every league usually has one.

We started giving this award out in 2004 and the crying has died out substantially. It's a travelling trophy. Someone manages to earn it every year. It never fails.

 

[u999spf]

What if I have each owner submit a short, quick email along with the trade agreement where they justify the trade from their point of view. Maybe this would serve 2 purposes.

1- Each owner would at least give it a little thought as they type it out, providing some type of sanity check.

2- Each of the other owners would theoretically understand why the trade was made from their point of view.

For instance Team A trades A.Gates for Jay Cutler mid season and says...

"I am making this trade for a QB because I lost my starter to injury and I have KWII as a backup and I asked around and this is the best deal I could get for Gates. So and So did happen to offer me Matt Hasslebeck for Gates but he is in my division and has a 2 game lead on me and I didn't want to give him Gates."

 

[renesauz]

So this has been a problem since the inception of FF.In my league I commish in we had teams that would have fire sales the week before the trade deadline for future draft picks. We have a 2 player keeper league and those teams out of the playoff hunt sold off their non keepers to other teams for draft picks the following year.There was a ton of uproar especially from those teams that had a solid lineup and didnt need to give up picks. But the end conclusion is that you have to let people run their franchises the way they want. If someone is stupid enough to make a trade then you have to give the other guy props for making the offer.

No offense dude...but that's just stupid. Why would you be allowed to trade future picks if you only keep two current players? The rules might as well clearly say BUY A CHAMPIONSHIP NEXT YEAR BY SELLING YOUR BEST PLAYERS THIS YEAR. Trading of future picks only makes sense in true dynasty leagues. No wonder people complain...they really are getting screwed.To the OP: Complaints about trades have always, and will always happen. All you can do is set up a fair review process, and stick to it.I would recomend writing into your rules that the commissioner has the power to approve trades, but only a committee can disapprove trades. Then, only the commissioner can send a trade to committee, except for his own trades (designate an alternate commish to review your stuff).Bad trades are far more common in dynasty, and much harder to police, because you absolutely want to make sure that you never let a trade get disaproved if both parties honestly felt they were making there teams better.

 

[Road Warriors]

What if I have each owner submit a short, quick email along with the trade agreement where they justify the trade from their point of view. Maybe this would serve 2 purposes.1- Each owner would at least give it a little thought as they type it out, providing some type of sanity check.2- Each of the other owners would theoretically understand why the trade was made from their point of view. For instance Team A trades A.Gates for Jay Cutler mid season and says..."I am making this trade for a QB because I lost my starter to injury and I have KWII as a backup and I asked around and this is the best deal I could get for Gates. So and So did happen to offer me Matt Hasslebeck for Gates but he is in my division and has a 2 game lead on me and I didn't want to give him Gates."

Playing devils advocate here, I wouldn't want to give up my strategic thinking to the rest of the league. Asking trade partners to describe their logic in a trade gives insight to the rest of the league of how they value players, evaluate trades, etc. I'd rather keep my own counsel thinking through trades.As a commish, one approach I take is to try to view a trade from each owners perspective, and see if I can come up with a reasonable motivation for the trade. If I can, I'd deflect any criticism of the trade with that perspective, whether it was the trader's POV or not.

 

[Road Warriors]

So this has been a problem since the inception of FF.In my league I commish in we had teams that would have fire sales the week before the trade deadline for future draft picks. We have a 2 player keeper league and those teams out of the playoff hunt sold off their non keepers to other teams for draft picks the following year.There was a ton of uproar especially from those teams that had a solid lineup and didnt need to give up picks. But the end conclusion is that you have to let people run their franchises the way they want. If someone is stupid enough to make a trade then you have to give the other guy props for making the offer.

No offense dude...but that's just stupid. Why would you be allowed to trade future picks if you only keep two current players? The rules might as well clearly say BUY A CHAMPIONSHIP NEXT YEAR BY SELLING YOUR BEST PLAYERS THIS YEAR. Trading of future picks only makes sense in true dynasty leagues. No wonder people complain...they really are getting screwed.To the OP: Complaints about trades have always, and will always happen. All you can do is set up a fair review process, and stick to it.I would recomend writing into your rules that the commissioner has the power to approve trades, but only a committee can disapprove trades. Then, only the commissioner can send a trade to committee, except for his own trades (designate an alternate commish to review your stuff).Bad trades are far more common in dynasty, and much harder to police, because you absolutely want to make sure that you never let a trade get disaproved if both parties honestly felt they were making there teams better.

My 2 keeper league allows pick trading, also. I haven't seen a situation arise yet where a team was willing to sacrifice next season. Because it's not true dynasty, you're early round picks are gold, and form the core of your team. If you give those up, you're most likely out of luck. It's been self-regulating so far. Part of that is a the keeper format that keeps top talent ( first 2 rounds of picks ) in the draft pool every year.

 

[thayman]

Out-sourced Commish is the best way. We have two seperate FF leagues here at work and switched the Commishes around.

 

[Pickle Rody]

What if I have each owner submit a short, quick email along with the trade agreement where they justify the trade from their point of view. Maybe this would serve 2 purposes.1- Each owner would at least give it a little thought as they type it out, providing some type of sanity check.2- Each of the other owners would theoretically understand why the trade was made from their point of view. For instance Team A trades A.Gates for Jay Cutler mid season and says..."I am making this trade for a QB because I lost my starter to injury and I have KWII as a backup and I asked around and this is the best deal I could get for Gates. So and So did happen to offer me Matt Hasslebeck for Gates but he is in my division and has a 2 game lead on me and I didn't want to give him Gates."

No, no, no......this creates way too much work for any commish to deal with. NOT A GOOD IDEA.PLUS, if you asked me to do this, I'm bolting the league. It's none of your business how I justify my rankings and trade values.

 

[renesauz]

So this has been a problem since the inception of FF.In my league I commish in we had teams that would have fire sales the week before the trade deadline for future draft picks. We have a 2 player keeper league and those teams out of the playoff hunt sold off their non keepers to other teams for draft picks the following year.There was a ton of uproar especially from those teams that had a solid lineup and didnt need to give up picks. But the end conclusion is that you have to let people run their franchises the way they want. If someone is stupid enough to make a trade then you have to give the other guy props for making the offer.

No offense dude...but that's just stupid. Why would you be allowed to trade future picks if you only keep two current players? The rules might as well clearly say BUY A CHAMPIONSHIP NEXT YEAR BY SELLING YOUR BEST PLAYERS THIS YEAR. Trading of future picks only makes sense in true dynasty leagues. No wonder people complain...they really are getting screwed.To the OP: Complaints about trades have always, and will always happen. All you can do is set up a fair review process, and stick to it.I would recomend writing into your rules that the commissioner has the power to approve trades, but only a committee can disapprove trades. Then, only the commissioner can send a trade to committee, except for his own trades (designate an alternate commish to review your stuff).Bad trades are far more common in dynasty, and much harder to police, because you absolutely want to make sure that you never let a trade get disaproved if both parties honestly felt they were making there teams better.

My 2 keeper league allows pick trading, also. I haven't seen a situation arise yet where a team was willing to sacrifice next season. Because it's not true dynasty, you're early round picks are gold, and form the core of your team. If you give those up, you're most likely out of luck. It's been self-regulating so far. Part of that is a the keeper format that keeps top talent ( first 2 rounds of picks ) in the draft pool every year.

REALLY?! So if I'm no longer in the running this year, nobody would call me out for trading my two best players for a first and second round pick next year?ON the flip side, if I'm borderline playoff team, I'll gladly sacrifice next year to gaurentee I'm in the money this year (it just makes fiscal sense).Just because the trade is fair to the players involved (as the above scenario would be), it doesn't mean it's reasonable and fair to the rest of the league. It is, by definition, a fire sale. A keep two league which allows future draft picks INVITES such fire sales.

 

[kethnaab]

teams out of the playoff hunt do not get to make trades

this solves a ton of issues

 

[comfortably numb]

I don't like any league that would not allow me to make the trades i would want.

But, what do your league mates advocate?

That is what is most important.

Don't tell them to simply tell you whats wrong, ask for opinions from everyone.

Start a thread in your league asking what would you want to change, and how would you change it?

 

[Pictus Cat]

So this has been a problem since the inception of FF.

Correct. Have a email discussion of trades. Start it out with the above statement. Fully drive this point home. The league needs to come to an understanding that most everything you try will fail in some way. The answer is to get a general understanding that everyone should always be trying to improve their team. Period. This should always be assumed in a trade unless collusion is suspected.Then address this problem.

Educate or bury bad owners. Give them everything they need to know. This site. A co-owner. Email them some good rankings. A clue, a cheatsheet, all the answers to the test. If they won't take help or get better, make them pay long term for their mistakes. Get everyones money a year in advance with the understanding that if you ruin your team, no refunds. Your paid entry will go to your replacement if you quit. Only picks that are paid for can be traded. This will make it a lot easier to get a new owner when his entry is already paid for the years he has no picks to rebuild his team.

Bad owners cause almost all the trade problems.

Don't confuse bad owners with owners that vary in opinions. This is why I was not fond of the Cry Baby suggestion above. My best owners participate. They disagree on players and strategies. Nothing wrong with it. Bad owners can not defend themselves.

On trading draft picks in a 2 keeper, we don't allow trading of draft picks until the season is over. That way, picks are traded for keepers. Otherwise, you may find a trend of players trading away picks to the popular or most familiar owners.

On having teams justify their trade, this has always been reduced to "you're full of it and you know you were ripping him off" for my leagues. It also results in discussions on how everyone disagrees with the reasoning sometimes. Entertaining to see two owners not in the trade argue why it was the other guy that got ripped off. Not very usefull though, and could be unhealthy stress.

I've done well in my leagues, and even when my opponents can't come up with why a trade is bad, they 'know' I ripped someone off." This started when I stopped giving away honest strategies and player assessments during these justifications because I was basically called a liar and weakened my ability to compete for no resolution.

 

[Road Warriors]

So this has been a problem since the inception of FF.In my league I commish in we had teams that would have fire sales the week before the trade deadline for future draft picks. We have a 2 player keeper league and those teams out of the playoff hunt sold off their non keepers to other teams for draft picks the following year.There was a ton of uproar especially from those teams that had a solid lineup and didnt need to give up picks. But the end conclusion is that you have to let people run their franchises the way they want. If someone is stupid enough to make a trade then you have to give the other guy props for making the offer.

No offense dude...but that's just stupid. Why would you be allowed to trade future picks if you only keep two current players? The rules might as well clearly say BUY A CHAMPIONSHIP NEXT YEAR BY SELLING YOUR BEST PLAYERS THIS YEAR. Trading of future picks only makes sense in true dynasty leagues. No wonder people complain...they really are getting screwed.To the OP: Complaints about trades have always, and will always happen. All you can do is set up a fair review process, and stick to it.I would recomend writing into your rules that the commissioner has the power to approve trades, but only a committee can disapprove trades. Then, only the commissioner can send a trade to committee, except for his own trades (designate an alternate commish to review your stuff).Bad trades are far more common in dynasty, and much harder to police, because you absolutely want to make sure that you never let a trade get disaproved if both parties honestly felt they were making there teams better.

My 2 keeper league allows pick trading, also. I haven't seen a situation arise yet where a team was willing to sacrifice next season. Because it's not true dynasty, you're early round picks are gold, and form the core of your team. If you give those up, you're most likely out of luck. It's been self-regulating so far. Part of that is a the keeper format that keeps top talent ( first 2 rounds of picks ) in the draft pool every year.

REALLY?! So if I'm no longer in the running this year, nobody would call me out for trading my two best players for a first and second round pick next year?ON the flip side, if I'm borderline playoff team, I'll gladly sacrifice next year to gaurentee I'm in the money this year (it just makes fiscal sense).Just because the trade is fair to the players involved (as the above scenario would be), it doesn't mean it's reasonable and fair to the rest of the league. It is, by definition, a fire sale. A keep two league which allows future draft picks INVITES such fire sales.

A week 10 trade deadline contains much of that, very few teams are out of it by then. This league is also a bunch of guys with a long (20+ years ) RL history, so that probably contains some of that, too. And I haven't seen any owner in this group that would give up next year. But, in an internet league, for significant stakes, I can certainly see your point.

 

[Yenrub]

So this has been a problem since the inception of FF.In my league I commish in we had teams that would have fire sales the week before the trade deadline for future draft picks. We have a 2 player keeper league and those teams out of the playoff hunt sold off their non keepers to other teams for draft picks the following year.

My league does something like this, except we don't allow trading of future draft picks.We keep 2 players also but they can only be kept for 1 season after they were drafted.Our trade deadline is week 10Every now and then you will see an elite player traded from non playoff bound teams in exchange for some good keeper options.Some guys don't like it but they understand it

 

[u999spf]

teams out of the playoff hunt do not get to make tradesthis solves a ton of issues

We have a Week 9 trade deadline but I think this is a good idea to add to that rule that if you are eliminated from playoff contention prior to week 9 you can't make trades either. This would further help to eliminate fire sales.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

Disclaimer: I only play in dynasty now so my view may be skewed that direct.

I like that teams can run their teams however they see fit. But i do have a week 10 trade deadline just to minimze a team buying achampionship. Plus if you trade draft picks, you must pay for that year in advance. I also have a kangaroo fine for trader whiners. its ok to harrass for bad trades, but as soon as you request a trade review, then its up for league vote. If the league agrees that the trade smacks of collusion, the teams involved get the fine, but if the league disagrees, the complaintant gets the fine.

Only trade I objected to last year was late in the season, an outgoing owner traded Anderson for Chris Brown. My objection was that outgoing owners (it had already been decided that it was his last week and a new owner would take over the next week) should not be allowed to trade players away. needless to say, the new owner was not happy about the trade.

 

[kbleck]

So this has been a problem since the inception of FF.In my league I commish in we had teams that would have fire sales the week before the trade deadline for future draft picks. We have a 2 player keeper league and those teams out of the playoff hunt sold off their non keepers to other teams for draft picks the following year.There was a ton of uproar especially from those teams that had a solid lineup and didnt need to give up picks. But the end conclusion is that you have to let people run their franchises the way they want. If someone is stupid enough to make a trade then you have to give the other guy props for making the offer.

No offense dude...but that's just stupid. Why would you be allowed to trade future picks if you only keep two current players? The rules might as well clearly say BUY A CHAMPIONSHIP NEXT YEAR BY SELLING YOUR BEST PLAYERS THIS YEAR. Trading of future picks only makes sense in true dynasty leagues. No wonder people complain...they really are getting screwed.To the OP: Complaints about trades have always, and will always happen. All you can do is set up a fair review process, and stick to it.I would recomend writing into your rules that the commissioner has the power to approve trades, but only a committee can disapprove trades. Then, only the commissioner can send a trade to committee, except for his own trades (designate an alternate commish to review your stuff).Bad trades are far more common in dynasty, and much harder to police, because you absolutely want to make sure that you never let a trade get disaproved if both parties honestly felt they were making there teams better.

My 2 keeper league allows pick trading, also. I haven't seen a situation arise yet where a team was willing to sacrifice next season. Because it's not true dynasty, you're early round picks are gold, and form the core of your team. If you give those up, you're most likely out of luck. It's been self-regulating so far. Part of that is a the keeper format that keeps top talent ( first 2 rounds of picks ) in the draft pool every year.

REALLY?! So if I'm no longer in the running this year, nobody would call me out for trading my two best players for a first and second round pick next year?ON the flip side, if I'm borderline playoff team, I'll gladly sacrifice next year to gaurentee I'm in the money this year (it just makes fiscal sense).Just because the trade is fair to the players involved (as the above scenario would be), it doesn't mean it's reasonable and fair to the rest of the league. It is, by definition, a fire sale. A keep two league which allows future draft picks INVITES such fire sales.

I see your point although I dont agree with it. We have our trade deadline set at week 9 so by then you arent 100% sure if you are in or out of the chance for money. And in reality, once the playoffs start, much of FF is luck in the playoffs. Fire sales arent normally going to include your best 2 players, it is going to be the supporting cast that gets traded. For example one team this year had Palmer, McGahee, Portis, Holt, B. Edwards. He was 2-6 for the year and ended up trading Holt for a 3rd and Edwards for a 3rd. The reality of this is that no one is going to trade for those players in the off season because almost everyone has 2 decent keepers. So if somone is desperate to try and win this year they have to eat the draft picks the following year.The people that paid a 3rd for Holt will have to drop him in the off season and wont get any return. That is the sacrifice you have to decide on. In the 10 years I have been in this league only once have I seen a player traded for a 1st round pick.We decided to bump the number of keepers up to 3 after next season but we dont want to go full dynasty because the draft really is a lot of fun to get new players each year. And in a home town in person draft, that was critical for keeping our league active and fun.

 

[GregR_2]

Here's something that I don't include in my more hardcore leagues but that I do in the friendly leagues where interaction is more important than the rest.

We have a counter-offer period. Basically after a trade is nominally accepted, other teams can make an offer to either team in the trade for the exact package of players/picks in the original trade. Either trading team can switch to a new offer, which invalidates the previous trade.

The idea behind it, put bluntly, is, you had the opportunity to make a better offer. If you didn't, the trade wasn't as heinous as you're claiming so shut up. To put it more diplomatically, it forces people to face that the actual market value for a player is frequently not what they think it should be. In the league that I do have this in, we frequently get comments like, "That's robbery!" "So make a better offer." "No way, I don't like the player that much." It sort of brings it all to a head when the person's #####ing can be put to the test of him acting.

But again, if hardcore FF is what you're about, I think people need to be adults and deal with the fact they don't like trades sometimes.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

When it comes to fantasy football, the fewer rules the better. Leagues that have a giant tome of a rulebook tend to be less fun and still never cover everything. In fact, they encourage rules-lawyers to play a new game where finding loopholes is the challenge. If your system works, keep using it. I don't like the "within one player" rule. What if three-for-1 or four-for-1 makes sense to both parties?

One league I'm in requires a short justification from both parties when they submit a trade. Just a few sentences explaining why the trade is good for their team. That alone makes people think a little and present a compelling argument. At the very least, you get the sense that each team honestly believes they're improving their club.

 

[u999spf]

Here's something that I don't include in my more hardcore leagues but that I do in the friendly leagues where interaction is more important than the rest.We have a counter-offer period. Basically after a trade is nominally accepted, other teams can make an offer to either team in the trade for the exact package of players/picks in the original trade. Either trading team can switch to a new offer, which invalidates the previous trade.The idea behind it, put bluntly, is, you had the opportunity to make a better offer. If you didn't, the trade wasn't as heinous as you're claiming so shut up. To put it more diplomatically, it forces people to face that the actual market value for a player is frequently not what they think it should be. In the league that I do have this in, we frequently get comments like, "That's robbery!" "So make a better offer." "No way, I don't like the player that much." It sort of brings it all to a head when the person's #####ing can be put to the test of him acting.But again, if hardcore FF is what you're about, I think people need to be adults and deal with the fact they don't like trades sometimes.

Greg - This is actually something I was kicking around the possibility of using. For me, I feel like it takes away from the owners who put in the time and/or forethought into creating the deal and then some other owner (who isn't as active) swoops in steals it out from under you. However, this would really lead to the best deals possible. One of the complaints I usually here is..."I would have offered more than that if I knew so and so was available."I mean before I make a deal and I feel like I am offering a valuable player, I hit the message boards, email and phones to let it be known that PlayerX is available if you are interested, so I feel like I am getting the best deal I could get at the time. But I do hear from other owners, who may not be on top of things or whatever, that they could have put together a better deal, and I say, you had your chance, where were you.Also - this may slow down the actual deals getting processed if there is a review/respond period and you need a player for that week, but those things can be worked out.

 

[Yenrub]

Here's something that I don't include in my more hardcore leagues but that I do in the friendly leagues where interaction is more important than the rest.We have a counter-offer period. Basically after a trade is nominally accepted, other teams can make an offer to either team in the trade for the exact package of players/picks in the original trade. Either trading team can switch to a new offer, which invalidates the previous trade.The idea behind it, put bluntly, is, you had the opportunity to make a better offer. If you didn't, the trade wasn't as heinous as you're claiming so shut up. To put it more diplomatically, it forces people to face that the actual market value for a player is frequently not what they think it should be. In the league that I do have this in, we frequently get comments like, "That's robbery!" "So make a better offer." "No way, I don't like the player that much." It sort of brings it all to a head when the person's #####ing can be put to the test of him acting.But again, if hardcore FF is what you're about, I think people need to be adults and deal with the fact they don't like trades sometimes.

Greg - This is actually something I was kicking around the possibility of using. For me, I feel like it takes away from the owners who put in the time and/or forethought into creating the deal and then some other owner (who isn't as active) swoops in steals it out from under you. However, this would really lead to the best deals possible. One of the complaints I usually here is..."I would have offered more than that if I knew so and so was available."I mean before I make a deal and I feel like I am offering a valuable player, I hit the message boards, email and phones to let it be known that PlayerX is available if you are interested, so I feel like I am getting the best deal I could get at the time. But I do hear from other owners, who may not be on top of things or whatever, that they could have put together a better deal, and I say, you had your chance, where were you.Also - this may slow down the actual deals getting processed if there is a review/respond period and you need a player for that week, but those things can be worked out.

It’s not a bad idea but is it fair to the guy who took the time to actually find out that “coveted player” was available?Also how long does this “get a chance to top the agreed upon offer” type thing go on?Team A accepts a trade from Team BThen Team C comes along and says to Team A, “I didn’t know that guy was available I will give you a better deal than you got from Team B” So after that happens does Team B get a chance to come over the top of Team C? And so on and so on?

 

[u999spf]

Here's something that I don't include in my more hardcore leagues but that I do in the friendly leagues where interaction is more important than the rest.We have a counter-offer period. Basically after a trade is nominally accepted, other teams can make an offer to either team in the trade for the exact package of players/picks in the original trade. Either trading team can switch to a new offer, which invalidates the previous trade.The idea behind it, put bluntly, is, you had the opportunity to make a better offer. If you didn't, the trade wasn't as heinous as you're claiming so shut up. To put it more diplomatically, it forces people to face that the actual market value for a player is frequently not what they think it should be. In the league that I do have this in, we frequently get comments like, "That's robbery!" "So make a better offer." "No way, I don't like the player that much." It sort of brings it all to a head when the person's #####ing can be put to the test of him acting.But again, if hardcore FF is what you're about, I think people need to be adults and deal with the fact they don't like trades sometimes.

Greg - This is actually something I was kicking around the possibility of using. For me, I feel like it takes away from the owners who put in the time and/or forethought into creating the deal and then some other owner (who isn't as active) swoops in steals it out from under you. However, this would really lead to the best deals possible. One of the complaints I usually here is..."I would have offered more than that if I knew so and so was available."I mean before I make a deal and I feel like I am offering a valuable player, I hit the message boards, email and phones to let it be known that PlayerX is available if you are interested, so I feel like I am getting the best deal I could get at the time. But I do hear from other owners, who may not be on top of things or whatever, that they could have put together a better deal, and I say, you had your chance, where were you.Also - this may slow down the actual deals getting processed if there is a review/respond period and you need a player for that week, but those things can be worked out.

It’s not a bad idea but is it fair to the guy who took the time to actually find out that “coveted player” was available?Also how long does this “get a chance to top the agreed upon offer” type thing go on?Team A accepts a trade from Team BThen Team C comes along and says to Team A, “I didn’t know that guy was available I will give you a better deal than you got from Team B” So after that happens does Team B get a chance to come over the top of Team C? And so on and so on?

I agree, this would need to be setup so that it was all resolved within a 24 hour period. Maybe something along the lines of once Trade A is proposed and accepted, all teams have 24 hrs to put up a counter-offer. Then all the counter-offers are sent out to the league as they come in, but the once the 24 hr period has passed the best offer is accepted and processed.I don't really like this but I may have to put it out there for a league vote, because I think the owner who put together the original deal could really get screwed in this type of format. Although, if they are the type of owner that really tries to prey on the unsuspecting owner, these types of deals won't be able to slip through, so that is the give and take you have to accept with this type of setup, i guess.

 

[FantasyTrader]

If you vote to veto a trade (and the trade winds up actually veto'd) and you end up being wrong with no injuries occuring to the player's involved, the teams that voted to nix it lose their 1st rounder next year. (Only works for dynasty).

The problem with most trade veto guidelines is that there's no reprecussion for being wrong. If I'm a crappy person and see an already solid squad even POTENTIALLY improve more, why wouldn't I veto it? Vetos should only be saved for occasions where it's so blantant, you have no problem betting you're 1st rounder next year to reverse it. If you're not willing to take that chance then the trade is close enough to be allowed.

 

[GregR_2]

Here's something that I don't include in my more hardcore leagues but that I do in the friendly leagues where interaction is more important than the rest.We have a counter-offer period. Basically after a trade is nominally accepted, other teams can make an offer to either team in the trade for the exact package of players/picks in the original trade. Either trading team can switch to a new offer, which invalidates the previous trade.The idea behind it, put bluntly, is, you had the opportunity to make a better offer. If you didn't, the trade wasn't as heinous as you're claiming so shut up. To put it more diplomatically, it forces people to face that the actual market value for a player is frequently not what they think it should be. In the league that I do have this in, we frequently get comments like, "That's robbery!" "So make a better offer." "No way, I don't like the player that much." It sort of brings it all to a head when the person's #####ing can be put to the test of him acting.But again, if hardcore FF is what you're about, I think people need to be adults and deal with the fact they don't like trades sometimes.

Greg - This is actually something I was kicking around the possibility of using. For me, I feel like it takes away from the owners who put in the time and/or forethought into creating the deal and then some other owner (who isn't as active) swoops in steals it out from under you. However, this would really lead to the best deals possible. One of the complaints I usually here is..."I would have offered more than that if I knew so and so was available."I mean before I make a deal and I feel like I am offering a valuable player, I hit the message boards, email and phones to let it be known that PlayerX is available if you are interested, so I feel like I am getting the best deal I could get at the time. But I do hear from other owners, who may not be on top of things or whatever, that they could have put together a better deal, and I say, you had your chance, where were you.Also - this may slow down the actual deals getting processed if there is a review/respond period and you need a player for that week, but those things can be worked out.

It’s not a bad idea but is it fair to the guy who took the time to actually find out that “coveted player” was available?Also how long does this “get a chance to top the agreed upon offer” type thing go on?Team A accepts a trade from Team BThen Team C comes along and says to Team A, “I didn’t know that guy was available I will give you a better deal than you got from Team B” So after that happens does Team B get a chance to come over the top of Team C? And so on and so on?

Of course it is up to you on how you set it up if you use it. Some examples of how it could work: 1. Have a single period for counter-offers. At the end of it, if a team switches, that is the trade that goes through immediately. If both teams switch to other offers, they go through immediately. If you do this, I think the original teams in the trade should get a chance to make one final counter-offer though.2. If a team switches to a counter-offer, the old trade is immediately gone and a brand new counter-offer period starts up on the new trade. So you have a 24 hour period. 12 hours in, Team A says he's going to go with a counter-offer from team C. A full new 24 hour period starts up.My league goes with the latter, though actually I would personally favor #1. I can see my league switching to that at some point, but we haven't brought it up to a vote yet. I do understand the "sucks to be the guy who did all the work to find a trade and then has it taken from you". Though it is true that everyone is on an even footing in that regards, and also both of the ways I mention of doing it above, the original team who found the player can still come back with a better offer later. It just forces the trade to happen closer to market value which was the goal of the league in the first place.Another way of addressing this, is that as you guys noticed from this sort of idea, a big part of the problem is that "I didn't know the player was available for trade or I'd have made a better offer than he accepted". You can address it after the fact which is what my earlier suggestion there does. Or, you could do it before the fact and require any team who is shopping players to make a league-wide announcement they are shopping them. I don't favor that one in general. Though in my hardcore dynasty league, we use this for firesales. Anyone who is considering a trade that may be deemed a firesale (and we list the criteria used in deciding if a trade qualifies as a firesale) must notify the entire league of their intent. While a firesale can drastically change the landscape of a season, it's easier to stomach if everyone knew a team was considering such a move so they had an equal chance to go after their players.It may even be enough to just have a talk with the league as a whole before the season, point out the strife the arguing about trades causes, and then point out it is in every owner's best interest to shop players around before agreeing to trades. It may be enough to just point out not only will it help the league run smoother if people do this on their own, but they will probably get better trades out of doing so.