Is this fair?

[Rob g 1]

Ok keeper league get to keep 2. Ppr 1 pt per reception td pass 4 pts. I want to keep McCoy and Doug Martin. A person in my league has Brandon Marshall as a keeper and next worthy candidate is McFadden. The league manager didnt lock trades or trades for draft picks. He offered me 2nd round pick for Rodgers. League manager vetoed trade and put it to a vote.

 

Regardless of outcome of vote I think trade should be valid since he didn't lock trades. Both parties in trade are happy and think its fair. People in league argue that it messes with parity but I disagree because now my friend has Marshall Rodgers and 1st pick as opposed to Marshall McFadden 1st pick and 24th pick. What do you guys think.

[nadnewob 1]

you should get out of the league if trade vetoes are allowed.

[madd futher mucker 36]

Congrats. You set a new all-time record for the earliest "is this fair" trade veto post. The PRE-season hasn't even started yet.

Your mama would be proud.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

I would never, ever permit any trade if I was allowed to vote on it.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

That's less fair than cancer.

[dehaven123 31]

Congrats. You set a new all-time record for the earliest "is this fair" trade veto post. The PRE-season hasn't even started yet.

Your mama would be proud.

 

u beat me to it!

[Rob g 1]

The vote is whether or not you can trade draft picks.

[IGotWorms 3,321]

Fair?? Who's the nihilist here??!

[tanatastic 2,061]

Trade vetoes are fine if done solely by the commish and should only happen in cases of clear collusion. The thing is, people in a group will lean toward the veto just out of boredom or jealousy. Only the commish, and only if cheating.

 

Thats said, i cant really comprehend the actual trade going on so I have no opinion.

[Rob g 1]

Here is the main issue people that don't have tradeable assets are mad because people with multiple keeper get the benefit of free picks from players beyond their 2 keepers. The weaker teams are fine with it because they can get better keeper by sacrificing later picks and retaining their first round picks.

[IGotWorms 3,321]

Here is the main issue people that don't have tradeable assets are mad because people with multiple keeper get the benefit of free picks from players beyond their 2 keepers. The weaker teams are fine with it because they can get better keeper by sacrificing later picks and retaining their first round picks.

The question is simple: can you trade potential keepers for draft picks?

 

Make it clear to the league that this is what you are deciding and that it will be the general rule applicable to everyone going forward.

 

Now you could argue that since such trades weren't prohibited before, your trade should be allowed regardless. I guess that depends on how much you are willing to ruffle feathers in your league. Personally I'd probably let it go but you'd certainly be within your rights not to.

[madd futher mucker 36]

The main issue is: Does your league have well spelled out bylaws? And what do your League Bylaws say about trades?

[Herbivore 907]

The trade gives him 3 keepers.

[IGotWorms 3,321]

The trade gives him 3 keepers.

My reading is that he will now keep Rodgers instead of McFadden, so still just two keepers.

[Herbivore 907]

My reading is that he will now keep Rodgers instead of McFadden, so still just two keepers.

 

No..the guy trading Rodgers is getting 3 keepers.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Is this fair, i lose three starters off of my roster for basically the entire year before it starts? No its not focking fair but its fantasy focking football.

[Rob g 1]

I'd be trading Rodgers. I'm keeping Doug marrtin and lesean McCoy. I'd be gaining the 24th pick. So I'd have 3 picks in the top 24. My friend would get Rodgers and keep him along with Brandon Marshall. He would have the 1st overall pick and and lose his 2nd round pick 24th.

It makes sense because McFadden is to risky and Rodgers won't be there at 24 in a draft.

 

In regards to bylaws it's an espn league nothing has been changed for 4 years except scoring. For trades all it says it stops nov 20th but doesn't say when it restart.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Well it may not be in the bylaws, but to make a point that you are technically correct you may cause a few owners to quit. Is that worth the competitive advantage you are trying to gain? Or is it better for the league to just draft with what slots you are originally aloted.

[Herbivore 907]

I'd be trading Rodgers. I'm keeping Doug marrtin and lesean McCoy. I'd be gaining the 24th pick. So I'd have 3 picks in the top 24. My friend would get Rodgers and keep him along with Brandon Marshall. He would have the 1st overall pick and and lose his 2nd round pick 24th.

It makes sense because McFadden is to risky and Rodgers won't be there at 24 in a draft.

 

In regards to bylaws it's an espn league nothing has been changed for 4 years except scoring. For trades all it says it stops nov 20th but doesn't say when it restart.

 

I get it. That's why I wrote..the trading Rodgers is getting 3 keepers. You are going into the draft with 3 assets.

[swirvenirvin 25]

Quit if it's vetoed and you havent paid your dues. But dont tell anyone just dont show up to the draft, to fock the league in the a-hole

[swirvenirvin 25]

 

No..the guy trading Rodgers is getting 3 keepers.

no he isn't

[swirvenirvin 25]

 

I get it. That's why I wrote..the trading Rodgers is getting 3 keepers. You are going into the draft with 3 assets.

Just stop it

[nadnewob 1]

Trade vetoes are fine if done solely by the commish and should only happen in cases of clear collusion. The thing is, people in a group will lean toward the veto just out of boredom or jealousy. Only the commish, and only if cheating.

 

Thats said, i cant really comprehend the actual trade going on so I have no opinion.

TOTALLY agree tantasitc. Only commish can call in a veto and only based on clear collusion. If I want to trade Denard Robinson for AP because I think Denard is going to BLOW UP, and there is no CLEAR sign of collusion, the trade must go through.

[rumbleready00 3]

First of all, I believe Veto's should be allowed because you may have a Commish who is not on the ball or know all the circumstances of a trade. However, I do not believe League members should be able to Vote on a trade because many people look at things as how it affects them and not the actual "trade" itself. I mostly look at trades from a "collusion" standpoint, however, a Commissioner does have the right to make a decision "For the good of the Game".

 

Now in this instant, it is not a question of "is this trade fair" - the question is "should this trade be allowed based on league rules?" Most leagues in their early stages probably do not have anything written or designed to cover this situation, so one has to be determined. Now I know many of you will tell me you cannot change the rules in the middle of the season, which I also believe. The point here is "No rule is written either way".

 

In a dynasty league, this trade should be allowed but not in a Redraft style league and here is why. I have years of experience with this and mostly benefitting myself, but I know now that it is not fair to the remainder of the league.

Let's say I have five potential keepers and I keep two and trade the others for second round picks. I would now have two good keepers and four second round picks. I could now use those extra picks to gamble those or later round picks and do the same every year and have an unfair advantage over the other teams - the effect could be teams leaving and the demise of the league.

 

To make this easier to understand, you could tell teams they need to declare their two keepers, and then you can make any trades that you want - the reason most leagues don't do this is all of the injuries is the off-season. In this instance, Rodgers is not available to be traded unless you kept him.

[cotarice12 18]

If you keep only 2 players each, and yours are Martin and McCoy, I'm not sure how you even have Rodgers to trade. Your roster at this point in the year should only consist of the 2 keepers. All other players are free agents/draftable. You would have to declare Rodgers as one of your keepers and then trade him to do the deal. You can't trade assets that are no longer yours. I don't see any way this should be allowed to occur besides you declaring Rodgers as one of your keepers.

[Herbivore 907]

If you keep only 2 players each, and yours are Martin and McCoy, I'm not sure how you even have Rodgers to trade. Your roster at this point in the year should only consist of the 2 keepers. All other players are free agents/draftable. You would have to declare Rodgers as one of your keepers and then trade him to do the deal. You can't trade assets that are no longer yours. I don't see any way this should be allowed to occur besides you declaring Rodgers as one of your keepers.

Exactly

[ralphster 274]

Everyone got hung up on the veto. This trade should never have been allowed unless you declared Rodgers as one of your keepers. Stop trying to game the system Rob.

[chroniciguana 13]

And so it begins ...

[steelers2101 7]

Rob g, you hit the nail on the head in your response to your original question. Since you can keep just 2, you are getting essentially free value at no expense to you, and at the expense of everyone but who you are trading with by taking a talented player out of the pool. Our 3 keeper league has by-laws in place so that you can't get value out of who you would otherwise not keep, so in your case, if you trade Rodgers for a pick, since you have that extra pick now, it will be treated as if you kept Rodgers and now can only keep 1 of your RBs with that additional pick.

 

ralphster and cotarice are right.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Everyone got hung up on the veto. This trade should never have been allowed unless you declared Rodgers as one of your keepers. Stop trying to game the system Rob.

Well said.

 

Trying to gain an unfair advantage over your leaguemates is what destroys leagues. I hope they all veto your ownership and teach your cheating ass a lesson.

[IGotWorms 3,321]

If you keep only 2 players each, and yours are Martin and McCoy, I'm not sure how you even have Rodgers to trade. Your roster at this point in the year should only consist of the 2 keepers. All other players are free agents/draftable. You would have to declare Rodgers as one of your keepers and then trade him to do the deal. You can't trade assets that are no longer yours. I don't see any way this should be allowed to occur besides you declaring Rodgers as one of your keepers.

Not necessarily. When do rosters reset? Is it at the time you declare keepers? If so, then this guy shouldn't have even had Rodgers to trade. But if rosters don't reset until the draft, well then...

 

Or did he trade Rodgers before keepers were declared? It seems like he'd have to, right, so the other guy could declare Rodgers as a keeper in advance of the deadline. What would be wrong with that? He could've, say, traded Rodgers at the end of last year with the same result.

 

Point is, if there aren't rules in place on this stuff it isn't nearly as cut-and-dried as you seem to think.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Not necessarily. When do rosters reset? Is it at the time you declare keepers? If so, then this guy shouldn't have even had Rodgers to trade. But if rosters don't reset until the draft, well then...

 

Or did he trade Rodgers before keepers were declared? It seems like he'd have to, right, so the other guy could declare Rodgers as a keeper in advance of the deadline. What would be wrong with that? He could've, say, traded Rodgers at the end of last year with the same result.

 

Point is, if there aren't rules in place on this stuff it isn't nearly as cut-and-dried as you seem to think.

Cheater support group ^^

[IGotWorms 3,321]

Cheater support group ^^

Bullsh!t. You need to check the definition of "cheating" because this is nowhere near it.

 

At most the OP is bending the SPIRIT of the rules.

 

And even in that case, he has exposed a hole in the league's (apparently non-existent) rules. That is a service in a way.

 

I'm not saying one can take advantage of whatever loopholes there are, but what he's doing here is a fair question. I see nothing wrong with the practice in theory and it may be that his league will actually WANT to be able to do this sort of thing going forward.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Bullsh!t. You need to check the definition of "cheating" because this is nowhere near it.

 

At most the OP is bending the SPIRIT of the rules.

 

And even in that case, he has exposed a hole in the league's (apparently non-existent) rules. That is a service in a way.

 

I'm not saying one can take advantage of whatever loopholes there are, but what he's doing here is a fair question. I see nothing wrong with the practice in theory and it may be that his league will actually WANT to be able to do this sort of thing going forward.

[chroniciguana 13]

If you keep only 2 players each, and yours are Martin and McCoy, I'm not sure how you even have Rodgers to trade. Your roster at this point in the year should only consist of the 2 keepers. All other players are free agents/draftable. You would have to declare Rodgers as one of your keepers and then trade him to do the deal. You can't trade assets that are no longer yours. I don't see any way this should be allowed to occur besides you declaring Rodgers as one of your keepers.

I guess this depends on your view of when you cease to own your roster. And this will likely vary either by rule or tradition. I own my roster up to the moment I post my keepers on the draft board. Up until then I can do whatever I want with those names, short of selling them for money, drugs or sex. And this includes trading any surplus players for an additional draft pick. If whining is the yardstick for measuring fairness, we've never had any. A little groaning, yes. Whining, no. So, at least in our 12-person universe, I reckon what we're doing (and it's not done that often) is considered fair.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

Anyone who would not allow this should not play in a keeper league.

[Rob g 1]

Ok recap

-Keepers due August 25

League manager didn't adjust rules to compensate for trading draft picks

-we executed trade and were both happy

-I run the risk of Martin or McCoy getting hurt between now and keeper deadline. If they did I wouldn't be able to have Rodgers.

-with trade vetoed people think its a given I'm dropping Rodgers now the integrity of the keeper process is in jeopardy.

[swirvenirvin 25]

If you keep only 2 players each, and yours are Martin and McCoy, I'm not sure how you even have Rodgers to trade. Your roster at this point in the year should only consist of the 2 keepers. All other players are free agents/draftable. You would have to declare Rodgers as one of your keepers and then trade him to do the deal. You can't trade assets that are no longer yours. I don't see any way this should be allowed to occur besides you declaring Rodgers as one of your keepers.

No, I have 3 leagues like this. Your entire rosters carry over from last year, and then a week or two before the draft you have to declare your keepers.

[swirvenirvin 25]

Exactly so everyone who is pretending to know the league rules and that rosters don't carry over and saying rob is cheating is wrong.

[cotarice12 18]

Exactly so everyone who is pretending to know the league rules and that rosters don't carry over and saying rob is cheating is wrong.

 

Okay, I will agree with this if rosters are really yours until the 25th, as the op stated. I guess for me then, it isn't really a 2 keeper league in the most strict sense. I could trade half my team for draft picks before declaring, thus getting value for way more than just two players. This plays more like a dynasty league than true keeper in this rules format. To each his own, but it sounds like this needs to get clarified for future seasons.