Entries from October 2009 ↓

Q: In a 12 team league where QBs receive 6 points for passing touchdown and 1 point for every 25 yards, Team 1 (managed by the league commissioner and in first place) is trying to trade Ryan Grant and Kyle Orton for Team 2\’s Drew Brees (in last place).  Something does not seem right about it.

A: Tis the season for collusion.   At this point in the fantasy season, the disparity between the elite teams and the scrub teams becomes evident.   With that disparity comes the temptation for the scrub teams to dump their stars to a more competitive team in an act of collusion.   Whether the scrub team is helping out a friend or relative or trading fantasy stars for non-fantasy items like cash, booze or sexual favors, collusion poses a serious threat to the balance of your league.

We agree that any trade between first and last place teams at this stage of the season is suspicious.   However, the value exchange in this trade is, in our opinion, within reason.   Brady is now that top ranked QB (based off of ESPN rankings) while Orton is ranked 13th (so not even a starter in a 12-team league that starts 1 QB).   The difference in value here is clearly substantial.    That said, Ryan Grant is currently the 12th ranked RB, just below Michael Turner and above the likes of Steven Jackson, Clinton Portis, Matt Forte and LT – technically making him an RB1 in your league.   We would still rather be on the Brady side of this trade, but it is a reasonable strategy for the other team to downgrade at QB in order to improve significantly at RB – and keep in mind, Orton is still a solid QB on a competitive team (9TDs, 1 INT).

We recommend that you confront the two owners on the topic of collusion and ask them to defend the fact that this trade was made to improve BOTH teams.   However, in the absence of any evidence of collusion, you have no choice but to evaluate this trade on its own merit and we don’t believe the value exchange in this trade is overly lop-sided.

Q: I have a 10 team league set up with standard scoring.  Heading into week 8 we have team A at 6-1 that has both T. Brady and B. Roethlisberger on bye.  There has been a proposed trade from Team B(her husband) and he has offered either Joe Flacco or P. Rivers for B. Roethlisberger. His team is struggling and he is in a different division.  I took a vote among members and it was vetoed the problem lies in that I am the LM and our league settings say that only LM has control to approve or reject a trade(so i kind of went out of my way to take a vote to gauge the thought among league members).  I personally feel like there is collusion involved with this trade proposal.  I would like to veto this trade based on the fact that team A is in a bind and didnt pay attention to bye weeks and should be forced to either sit on two QB’s with bye’s or release one to the waiver wire and pick up a free agent.  Being competitive I don’t see any reason Team B would make this trade except to help out Team A.  He did also mention (jokingly) that he intended on trading back after this week (which I told him was out of the question).  I am 7-0 and in another division so it has no impact on my team or my chances on making the playoffs.  I just feel that this is an unfair trade and would like a second opinion.  He is seriously mad that I am leaning toward vetoing this trade and says I’m doing it for the benefit of my team.

A: As the LM you should be allowed to use any means at your disposal to evaluate a trade.   Putting the trade to a league vote is a natural option.   The value exchange between Roethlisberger and Flacco/Rivers is fine.   The problem is that Team A has no reason to make the trade… other than to help their spouse.   Based off that fact, we recommend that you stick to your guns, go with the majority vote and veto the trade.

Q: There’s no particular dispute in my league, but I have a general questions that would hopefully minimize trade disputes in our league in general. Someone brought of the topic of beign able to trade draft picks for next year’s draft.  Do you have any model rules or thoughts about trading draft picks in the middle of the season. For example, player “A” for other team’s third round draft pick.  Or player “A” for other teams player “B” and 8th round draft pick. We’re a deep league, but want to avoid draft pick fire sales and make sure franchises that are “throwing in the flag” for the season fulfill their responsibility to stay competitive.  Any thoughts would be appreciated.

A: Thanks for the inquiry and take some time to congratulate yourself for being a proactive owner and working to establish rules before a dispute occurs.   There are a number of options in regards to trading draft picks but here are some of the most common.

Option 1:   Do not allow draft picks to be trade.   The basis for this decision is that teams who are virtually eliminated from playoff contention will trade away their best players in exchange for next year’s draft picks.   As the team trading for draft picks has no motivation to keep the trade even as long as they can obtain more picks for the following season, such trades may compromise the balance of power during the current season.

Option 2:  Allow draft picks to be traded on a one for one basis.   In this scenario, owners may trade draft picks but the total number of draft picks that each owner has much remain the same.  An example of this would be Team A trades Michael Turner and next year’s 2nd round pick to Team B for Clinton Portis and next year’s 1st round pick.   Under option 2 this trade will be allowed, however, if Team A traded for Portis, next year’s 1st and 5th round picks, the trade would not be allowed because two draft picks would be exchanged for one.

Option 3:  Allow draft picks to be traded but only up to week 6.    In this scenario, owners have the freedom to trade draft picks at will.   However, by not allowing draft picks to be traded after week 6, you can eliminate some of the concerns of option 1 above, because very few owners will be willing to throw in the towel on the current season only five games into the season.  This helps to keep such trades on the level.

In most of our leagues, we have some version of option 3 implemented for draft picks and/or keepers.

One last concern to consider is if an owner has no plans to participate in your league next year they have no motivation to protect their draft pick’s for next season and may be willing to trade them at a loss in order to pickup value in the current season.   For this reason, you should maintain some sort of review process for all trades – whether they include draft picks or not.

Whatever your league decides, you are way ahead of the game by addressing this topic before it becomes an issue.

Q: We have a 12 team league and two of the owners are from the same family.  One of the owners from this family is an experienced fantasy owner (Team 1), the other is a rookie this year (Team 2).  Team 1 is 2-4, and team 2 is 5-1 at this point.

The only real weakness on Team 2 is DST.  These 2 teams are attempting a trade sending the Denver DST and Benjamin Watson to Team 2 in exchange for Vernon Davis and the Bengals DST.

The rationale is that Team 1 needs a producing Tight End and Team 2 needs a producing DST. Watson has done nothing since week 1 and Vernon Davis is averaging 10+ points more per game (We are a PPR league) than his other tight end over the last 3 games.

Team 1 has a DST averaging more points per game than the Denver DST, and Team 2 has Gates both of which have had their Bye already, so neither team really intends to play the players they are giving up barring injury.

Is this a fair trade or are these 2 guys fixing a hole in Team 2 intending to increase his chances?

A: Ha, love the fact that the fantasy “rookie” is 5-1.   Just goes to show we don’t know as much as we think we do about fantasy football.

Your concerns for collusion are duly noted given the familial relationship between the two owners involved but we recommend that you let this trade stand.   In this trade Team 1 is upgrading at TE and team 2 is upgrading at DST.   Since both teams are benefiting from the trade, and in the absence of any further proof of collusion, there aren’t really any grounds for a veto.

Considering Vernon Davis’ performance this past Sunday, Team 2 is definitely paying top dollar for their upgrade at DST.

Always have to keep your eye on the inter-family trades.

Q: On Oct 12th, Team A who was 4-1 traded Kevin Smith to Team B who was 1-4 for Tom Brady.  We believe Tom Brady is a much better player then Smith.  Is this a valid trade?

A: We recommend that you veto this trade.   Even if Team B is desperate for a RB, Team A should be required to give up more than Kevin Smith for one of the best QBs in football.

Q: Should I trade Eli Manning for Marques Colston?  I already have Peyton Manning and I don\’t have many good receivers.  At my receivers I have Devin Hester, DeSean Jackson, Randy Moss, and Santonio Holmes.  It is an espn 8 team, 16 player.

A: Hello, and sorry for the delay.   Peyton Manning is one of the most consistent and least injured QBs in the game.   Assuming you only start 1 QB each week, if you can get a top WR like Colston for your backup QB, we recommend you take the deal.

Q: On October 11, 2009, franchise owner A (who at the time is 0-4) trades Dustin Keller and Larry Johnson to franchise owner B (1-3) for McFadden, Josh Johnson and Crayton.

Team A has Schaub, Michael Bush and many under performing WR\’s.  As commish, I am responsible for approving all trades.  When I think there is collusion or some other unfair practice happening.  I put it to a league wide vote.

To date, I have only posted 2 trades to date in 3 years.  I felt I could not make a fair determination of this trade because i questioned why the worst team in our league traded for 3 players that did not help him immediately (Crayton playing terrible and on a week 6 bye).

The majority of the league approved the trade and it was a done deal.  I need to know if I am taking crazy pills here or is this trade completely off the mark.

FYI, the league was not happy when another franchise traded me Hightower/AP for Barber/Holmes/Olsen after week 4.

A: We recommend that you go with the majority on this one.   Honestly, none of the players involved in this trade have much fantasy value and therefore this trade should have little effect on the success of the two teams involved.   As commish you need to pick and choose your battles and we don’t believe that it is worth it to make an issue out of this transaction.

Collusion by definition creates an unfair advantage for one or both the teams involved and there is little, if any, advantage gained as a result of this trade.

Q: Standard scoring league (Yardage plus Scoring), 4pts, passing TD. Start 1 QB, 2RB, WR/TE, 1 RB/WR/TE, 1 K, 1 Def. This trade went down and need to know if it should be vetoed:

Team 1 traded Tom Brady and AZ Defense ;  Team 2 traded Devin Hester and Reggie Bush.  Should this trade be vetoed?

A: Brady has not started the season in the way most fantasy owners who drafted him had hoped.   However, he is still the 7th ranked QB (according to ESPN scoring) and has tons of potential.   For this trade to be allowed Team 2 should have to give up something more than Hester (32nd ranked WR) and Bush (41st ranked RB).   Arizona’s D is a middle of the pack squad and doesn’t really offset the initial unfairness of this trade.   We recommend a veto.

Q: I recently proposed a trade that would give Santana Moss, Clinton Portis and Mario Mannigham for Hines Ward, Anquan Boldin and Jonathan Stewart.  The trade has caught alot of flack.  The other guy presently has D. Williams and Julius Jones as is only RBs, besides Stewart.  I have Slaton, Ray Rice and Jamal Lewis on top of Portis.  My main WR, C. Johnson is injured.  I figured it was pretty even considering that Boldin has underperformed and Hines Ward is in a historically run heavy offense.

Unfortunately, the guys in my league are going off of the guys “name” and possible production, as well as last years production.  I feel if anything, i’m giving up more than enough.  Your thoughts?

A: This trade should not be vetoed.   Here are the players involved in this trade as ranked at their respective positions by ESPN through 5 weeks:

Team 1:
Santana Moss (17)
Clinton Portis (19)
Mario Manningham (7)

Team 2:
Hines Ward (12)
Anquan Boldini (38)
Jonathan Stewart (48)

Based off current performance, Team 1 stands to improve substantially.  However, names do matter, and we don’t expect Manningham to finish the season as high as 7 or Boldin to finish as low as 38.   That said you can’t ignore what these players have done so far this season.   No trade is going to be 100% even (and how could you tell at the time of the trade anyway).   But this trade offers both teams the chance to improve and a subjective league vote, where every other team has a vested interest in the outcome is not a fair way to assess this trade.   The trade should stand.

Q: Prior to the games on week 6, was this trade fair? Knowshon Moreno for Roddy White?I believe my trade was unfairly vetoed in my league (8 team, 16 roster spots. My opponent accepted the trade before White\’s breakout game, and as a league, we had agreed to discount any games played after a trade is accepted in determining if a trade was fair or not. Up to that point (before week 6), Roddy White had a total of 17 points and Moreno had a total of 36 points in our league.

A: It is our recommendations that this trade not be vetoed.   It is not practical to expect that any trade is 100% even.   Any trade that has the potential to benefit both parties involved, is not an example of collusion and is not overly lopsided should be allowed.  In this case, even including last week’s performances,  Moreno is the 21st ranked RB according to ESPN but has a ton of potential as he has only recently established a starting role on a competitive team while White is the 5th ranked receiver.    Arguments can be made for both sides and depending on each team’s depth at both the RB and WR positions, this trade can be mutually beneficial.  The trade should stand.