After reading the feedback I wanted to thank all who responded and would like to offer my own response to a few posters contentions. The multiquote function said I exceeded the amount of allowable quotes in a post so I'll BOLD the original quotes;
He doesn't like you as much as his friend. Perhaps if you were more likable your trade might have went through. However, seeing that you're the type of dude that would whine about it on a board like this, and you're prepared to go whine to your commish, it doesn't appear likely that you'll be doing anything close to making new friends anytime soon. I suggest you learn a lesson and try to make friends. Isn't that more important than doing well in fantasy football?Thank you for this little gem, you’re insight is astounding. I do have several “friends” in this league, some closer than others. I assume you would be fine with me calling one of my closer friends in the league and offering him MJD, R. Bush, A Peterson, Steve Smith, M. Harrison, T. Romo, Andre Johnson and $2.00 in cap money for Jesse Chatman because, Hey he’s a cool guy and by golly I like him! Do you believe there is ever a point where competitive balance in a league becomes an issue or is every transaction just Okee Dokee in your opinion?
I don't see a problem with the trade completed. Of course, the cap you folks use make this a little difficult for me to evaluate because I don't have a good idea of how all the positions end up being valued. What do the other owners think? I'd imagine that if this were a competitive league, the other owners would be on this if it were a problematic deal. I think all you can ask for out of the two owners is that they were both looking out for the good of their own team and that the deal appears to give both of them something. I think this deal passes muster. If the first guy doesn't want to trade with you for any reason, he really doesn't have to.An excellent response and I appreciate the thoughtful feedback. As of this response two other owners have raised an issue with the trade on our league message board but both other owners are division leaders and may have a “sour grapes” component to their reactions as well.
your offer was better but he decided, for whatever reason, that he wanted the other guy's trade. the best thing you can do is say nothing unless there is conclusive colluding going on.For the most part, I agree. This league is money league and has been in existence for approximately 15 consecutive years. I can’t remember a trade ever being overruled by the commish (we have no peer review process for trades and the decision is the commish’s alone). I’ve played in countless leagues and have always been an advocate of the “No Veto except in cases of clear collusion” principle. I have never, ever voted to veto a trade in any of my leagues but for some reason this trade touched a nerve which is why I wanted to get feedback on the perception of value offered in this deal. Thank you for your feedback.
I just read it again. Comes off as brutal doesn't it? Not fair of me to judge the guy that harshly without knowing him.
Not sure what sort of response he can expect that might be helpful. I think anyone that creates one of these collusion threads isn't all there. Seems that he's asking total strangers to look across the internet to peer into the hearts of other total strangers. How is this possible? Nothing good can come from one of these collusion threads except for the OP getting mocked and ridiculed. Am I off base there?Thank you for your more reasoned approach in this post. I think the response I was looking for was along the lines of “IMHO, your offer was clearly superior as ADP is blah blah blah…” or “The values here are close enough to be reasonable because…” or “I’d rather have Bowe at $1.10 and Brady at $4.10 plus the $2.00 and here’s why…”. My intent was not to ask you to assess the character of two people who you do not know and about whom I’ve provided no information, but rather to provide a knowledgeable valuation perspective given a set of two parameters under the limited conditions I described. So, to be perfectly honest, I do think your response was somewhat off base as it missed my original intent. Maybe I should have worded my post differently.
There is the answer to your question. He wants to win this year too. Why would he want to give you "a very good chance to win this year" to improve his team for this year and next when he can improve his team without helping a contender? From what I understand, he improves less with the new deal but you do not improve at all. I think his chances of winning are still better now, especially against you.I disagree with this for the following reasons which you could not have possibly known from my post; He does not want to win this year which is why he traded his four best players to a team in his own division (three divisions of four teams with the three division winners and one wildcard making the playoffs) who currently is in a tie for the division lead. So he chose to help a contender in his own division over an out of division team (in this case, my team).
This was the motivation for my harsh post. I don't know that he is that guy, but he might be. I'm sure his response will be telling if he chooses to reply.Once again, thank you for the benefit of the doubt. Your later responses in this thread demonstrate that you are not the callous, snide, quipster that your original post portrayed. I must say that this thread has been a learning experience. It appears that there is a portion of the posters on these boards who would rather comment on the integrity, personality and intelligence of the poster rather than attempt to address the question in a thoughtful manner. I expected better from the “Sharks” and I thank those that legitimately addressed my question without resorting to ad-hominems’s.
FWIW, I've found in the past that there is a lot more variability in the perception of "value" in any sort of keeper-league format. Owners tend to overvalue potential upside and undervalue more proven established players. Granted, he may only be keeping them for another year but it's possible he honestly thought the upside of more inexperienced players like Bowe, Jackson, & Williams made that offer more attractive. To me and most folks on the board, you clearly made the better offer, but it's at least possible that he thought otherwise. In FF (and life for that matter) I think it's usually better to interpret people's motivations in a more positive light and not take it personally. At the very least, that way you don't torpedo future trade opportunities with the same owner. I appreciate your candor. I clearly thought that my offer was superior but you’re correct that different owners have different perceptions of value and there is no accounting for that. I know it was probably difficult to swim against the current in the Shark Pool and lend support to a “whiner” in a collusion post but this is the type of response I was looking for.
So the dude had Edge, Manning, Owens AND Chad and somehow is still 0-6. In part this is cuz those 4 guys took up $25.40 out of his $40 cap space. He has like 15 other guys that average just under $1 each.
I'm thinking that he sees spending effective $3.20 on two sure starters for his team as being more beneficial than $6.60. If be thinks Brady>>>>Romo and doesn't believe in ADP for whatever reason (perhaps the share situation) I can see where he might like this offer a little better. Given that he has Owens and Chad he might just have a bit of a WR bias. Even the $2 itself might have been the prime moving factor as he gets a head start on next year.
At any rate, I just don't think there's enough there to go off on it. Protesting this trade seems a lot like protesting your own proposal as well.Another excellent, intelligent response. Thanks for your perspective!
In a keeper league, I might take Brady/DeAngelo over Romo/ADP... ADP has injury concerns, Romo can be inconsistent.
I might pull that trade with a friend also, over your offer. I have made soft trades (not collusion, just not bleeding the guy) to guys I like before. I have been in my leagues for 4-5 years, so like the social aspect.A dissenting view! But still an insightful post. This response shows that intelligent people can disagree civilly. Thanks for the response.
Here is a thought, maybe he just really likes Brady?We are all from Massachusetts so this may have really hit the nail on the head!
My favorite part about this thread is the complete lack of response from the OP.Sheesh, tough crowd! Give a guy a chance, I have a family to placate when I’m not wrapped up in fantasy football!
The board's input in these matters is always useless. They don't understand the implications of the trade unless they're part of the league.
It's weird, everyone flames the OP in these threads. Apparently nobody minds ridiculous trades that would be unfair for 90% of the league, until of course it happens in their league.I agree that it’s easy to throw stones but I would bet that most here, people that actually take the time to post on a fantasy football message board, would react differently if this happened in one of their own competitive leagues. We’re all competitors and no one likes to get beat!
If this were ACTUALLY a questionable trade, he wouldn't have to whine about it here because the commissioner and/or the other owners would have made it in an issue IN LEAGUE and it would have been taken care of IN LEAGUE.The commissioner has responded and has indicated a desire to introduce a peer review/veto system for trades based upon the feedback from league owners over this trade. He will not veto this trade but will propose a change to the trade approval process next year as he feels uncomfortable being the sole arbiter. I think that’s reasonable.
layer values. It takes a sales pitch, and with that, personality dynamics are always going to be in play. That you're getting your dress blown up over this suggests to me that other owners might not always take your offers with the same degree of seriousness that you take them. If his friend talked him into accepting this deal over yours, what exactly is your gripe? That the league should over-turn it because you offered what you think is a better deal?
If he's considering complaining about this, then chances are he's complained about something similar.
Totally agree here. There are numerous reasons why an owner won't accept a trade that looks fair. And Cobalt27's post is dead on as well. You need to sell the other owner on why he should accept your offer. Sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn't. You can't take rejection to trades personally.
