Having a crisis in our league with someone who has lost 5 in a row and seems to be giving up, lets call him Team A Team A gives up: Michael Turner Team B gives up: Ryan Fitzpatrick Mike Thomas Ryan Grant following that he trades: Team A gives up: Andre Johnson Jermichael Finley Ryan Grant Team B gives up: Mike Tolbert Owen Daniels Kevin Walter Brandon Lloyd
The first one is very one way (team B) but the second one actually isn't that bad. If you really think he's dropping out on the league than veto, other then that theres not much too the trades.
if he's giving up why is he making all these trades people who give up forget to set their lineups and keep the same team
Trading Andre Johnson? Hmm. He could have gotten better value for him. I don't see much wrong with either of the trades. He is giving away top players who are producing well enough, but I'm guessing he has some major holes. He's getting multiple middle ground players who have good potential to fill his holes. No veto, but you might want to propose a trade for his last remaining star palyers and see what you can get away with. ;-)
These are the underlying issues: Team B in the first trade is the commissioner and he's the recipient of Michael Turner. Team A posted this on the fantasy message board 3 days ago: Not exact quote since it's deleted but you can get the gist of it. Dom's league is another league a bunch of us are in where he is 5-2. For the whole season he's needed a QB (he drafted Peyton) and I've been dangling Romo every week in exchange for Jahvid Best and he kept refusing. When Best got hurt I told him I could still deal him Romo or Sanchez for a reasonable offer since I don't have a need for both QBs and he's hungry for one. Out of the blue he takes this terrible trade for Fitz and 2 scrubs in exchange for Turner. As far as I'm concerned, Romo > Fitz and Turner >>>> Best so he gets a worse deal on both ends, and this following a post about 'giving up'. Then he follows that trade up with the 3 to 4 player swap for Andre/Finley. His starting lineup goes from: QB: Hasselbeck RB: Turner, Best WR: Andre Johnson, Miles Austin TE: Finley FLEX: Delone Carter/Robert Meachem/James Jones/Justin Forsett K: Folk DEF: Giants into: QB: Fitzpatrick RB: Tolbert, Best WR: Miles Austin, Brandon Lloyd TE: Owen Daniels FLEX: Same as above plus Mike Thomas K: Folk DEF: Giants Commissioner refused to veto even though 7 out of 10 of us are against because 'we didn't vote on the nfl.com poll fast enough and it ended (there's a 24 hour trade window to vote). As far as I'm concerned that's the point of having a commissioner otherwise the website would police itself. How someone can say the above is an active effort to improve a team is beyond me? Am I going crazy here? Is this not collusion?
I don't see evidence of collusion. I see evidence of two imbalanced trades, but no active plan to purposely tank to make another team better. It's pretty clear that his team has sucked and I can't fault him for wanting to blow it up. As for Romo, I think you're overvaluing him greatly and I'd value him about equal to Fitz, if not below. Finley has been worthless the past four weeks (10/128/1TD) and is on a bye. Tolbert has significant value and I like him about as much as Turner in a ppr league going forward. My point is that it is fair to disagree about player value, but it is not fair to veto a deal between two teams without showing active collusion.
because they don't care anymore say Team A is out of contention. Team B's owner figures he can take advantage and bugs Team A to trade him his good players. Team A doesn't care, so he agrees to get the annoying guy off his back. Something like that happened in a league I'm in (co-managing a team with a friend, who fleeced another team).
I agree with that, I think people have the right to be stupid but not collusive. Conversely I think too many people vote to veto trades because it favors one team, that's why in the rotisserie hockey league I run I maintain the power to pass through or veto trades. I saw a completely fair trade get overturned in one of my football leagues last year cause a couple of guys didn't like that a playoff team got AP (and Holmes, who wasn't lighting it up at the time) and gave up TO, Matt Ryan - who he didn't need with Brees as his starter - and Brandon Jackson. My rule of thumb if an inbalanced trade happens is to ask the team who's perceived to be getting the short end what their mindset is, if they give an answer that shows they at least put some thought into it and had a reason for it going toward bettering their team, I'll allow the trade. If I don't hear back from them and it looks like a bad deal I'll veto it. In the example above though, I think personally the commish should have locked the guy's team the minute he posted openly about quitting.
Ok, that's good. Generally, unless it's pretty clear collusion I'm against vetoing trades. Everyone has their own opinions, ways of valuing players and strategies.
I can understand people against vetoes but in some cases (like this one) it had to be done by the rest of us for the sake of competition. I can argue that Ray Rice for Danny Woodhead and Sidney Rice is a good trade for some reason or another but a talent disparity so great I can't just let through. As far as I'm concerned, Ryan Grant and Mike Thomas are barely waiver worthy in this trade so it's Michael Turner for Ryan Fitzpatrick. A top 5 or top 10 QB I can understand but Ryan Fitzpatrick is rounding out the top 20. That is just unfair and luckily the rest of my league agrees. (Regardless of how strong/weak it makes a team) In the NFL a team is not going to dangle a star player and take the first 4th round pick offer when there are 5 other teams offering a first and second round draft pick. At least that's the way I see it.
I think the fact that he said he wasn't going to win anyway and wants to trade is some BS. Hell yes I would veto because that is cheating.
So if the guy says "i need to make some changes since I haven't won a game" you'd approve the trade but since he said "I'm giving up" it gets vetoed and the guy is stuck with his shitty team? That makes no sense. No collusion no veto. I would never play in this league again if that was me, but it's your league so whatever.
Just randomly giving players to another team for fifty cents on the dollar is every bit as bad as collusion though, and has the same effect. The minute someone admitted they're quitting, then their team should be locked before they can go through with goofy trades.
It got vetoed because as it says right above this post, elite players are going for pennies on the dollar. Maybe in some alternate way of thinking he had a plan in which this trade helps his team but the value disparity is ridiculous. Say I have Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, LeSean McCoy, and Arian Foster going into a week 12 game to make the playoffs but my Kicker just got hurt. I really need a kicker and I can only start 3 RB (2RB, 1 FLEX format) so I decide to trade Arian Foster for Stephen Gostkowski. 1: This trade helps both teams this week. Whoever gets Arian Foster gets a starting stud RB and I get a great kicker that will net me as many points as possible to help boost me into the playoffs. I can't use Arian Foster this week anyway so I benefit. This is fair? I see the same problem here. He mortgaged his entire elite lineup for what he explained to me as a chance to win this week because he has some players on a bye. In his estimation, every game is a must win going forward because 6-6 in his mind doesn't make the playoffs. I on the other hand, can not see how one week of picking up average players from other teams gives him a better chance to succeed than having 3 elite players for the rest of the season that will not have their production matched. Please tell me you can not see the reasoning in that.
So ultimately he's giving up; Turner Andre Johnson Finley and in return he's getting; Fitzpatrick Mike Thomas Mike Tolbert Owen Daniels Kevin Walter Brandon Lloyd Are you guys fucking kidding me saying that this should be allowed??? I honestly wouldn't start a single one of those players he is getting in the trade on either of my 2 teams. He's getting a bunch of second stringers for probably his 3 best players. I can understand a team in last place trading an injured Andre Johnson for less than he is worth, but this is just ridiculous. If these trades went through in my money leagues I would be pissed.
Exactly how I felt looking at those trades. I would veto the shit out of them. They are bullshit trades.
