Fantasy Football: Is this trade fair or cheating between family members?

[HeavyReign]

I'm in a 10 person league with scoring pretty heavily based on TDs. Its based on total points for the season and the top 4 spots pay. The 3rd place guy so far and his nephew made this trade last night:

3rd place gives Drew Brees and Hines Ward.

8th place gives Brett Favre and Braylon Edwards.

Does this seem fair or not.

[HeavyReign]

In the leauge itself the trade was challenged and is up for a league vote. I'll let you know what happens there and I'm curious to see if the votes come out the same here vs in the league.

[Atocep]

I'd be interested in hearing the reasoning behind the trade. Its odd to see a four player trade that involves a swap of the same positions.

On the surface it looks like the 8th place team is trying to sell high on Favre and Edwards and buy low on Brees and Ward. I can understand wanting to try something when sitting in 8th place, but the Brees hasn't shown anything that would lead you to believe he's going to start playing like he did last year.

The thing is because of the names involved, unless you're running a real serious money league, its hard to make an accusation on a trade like this.

[HeavyReign]

Its a fairly competitive league with a buyin of $250. On names alone there is obviously nothing wrong with the deal.

[Radii]

In the keeper league i'm in(which does tons of tracking and rankings so its easy to look stuff up):

Favre is the 7th best QB. Brees is the 27th best QB.

Edwards is the 3rd best WR. Hines Ward is 85th.


Of course, Ward has been hurt, Favre is old, and Brees and the Saints finally came alive last week. But this is just ridiculous. Favre for Brees if both players have a drastically different view on what will happen the rest of the season might be defensible. But combined with giving up a top 5 WR for a guy who has been hurt and wasn't doing anything special before he got hurt, I'd be fighting this one even in a free league.

[Buccaneer]

Brian, good to see you again. That's all.

[MikeVic]

I guess the thinking is that Brees will get good again, and Favre will come back down the earth. Brees is better than Favre if that happens.

I was reading something about Hines Ward, and how he would be easy to acquire from someone, and you can expect good numbers from him the rest of the year. I guess the guy's thinking this'll happen with Ward, and Edwards/Derek Anderson will come back down to earth too.

If it was me in the league though, I'd contest the trade too. Those are four big IFs that have to happen for this trade to make any kind of sense. If the trade was Brees/Edwards for Favre/Ward then I'd let it stand.

[larrymcg421]

I don't think it has to be cheating for the trade to be rejected. It's an unbalanced trade that shouldn't be allowed no matter what the reasons were for making it.

[QuikSand]

Seems to me it might matter what the league's rules say about trade contesting -- I've never felt comfortable intervening in what just seemed "dumb." I draw the line at collusion or cheating. To me, this trade seems perfectly defensible, I couldn't imagine casting a vote to intercede.

[Radii]

Brian, good to see you again. That's all.

+1 to that as well.

[Toddzilla]

I don't think it has to be cheating for the trade to be rejected. It's an unbalanced trade that shouldn't be allowed no matter what the reasons were for making it.Being "unbalanced" is not the grounds to overturn or veto a trade. That's the nature of playing the game, some trades are good for one side and not so good for the other.

Cheating and collusion are the only reasons you should ever overturn a deal IMO. Being dumb isn't against the rules, neither is taking advantage of it, so w/o proof of collusion, I think you have to let the trade stand.

[JeeberD]

Favre is bound to start sucking soon. And Ward is bound to start playing well soon. I see no reason to overturn it...

[Maple Leafs]

I would never play in a league where a trade could be voted down because the other owners didn't like it.

[Celeval]

Yeah - this isn't a trade I'd make, but it's arguable. I'd not vote to overturn it.

[larrymcg421]

Being "unbalanced" is not the grounds to overturn or veto a trade. That's the nature of playing the game, some trades are good for one side and not so good for the other.

Cheating and collusion are the only reasons you should ever overturn a deal IMO. Being dumb isn't against the rules, neither is taking advantage of it, so w/o proof of collusion, I think you have to let the trade stand.

I disagree. It's not about the two teams involved in the trade. It's about the other teams in the league, and a seriously unbalanced trade is unfair to the league as a whole.

[Toddzilla]

I disagree. It's not about the two teams involved in the trade. It's about the other teams in the league, and a seriously unbalanced trade is unfair to the league as a whole.I'll grant you that an unbalanced trade sucks for the rest of the league, but unless it is cheating, it is certainly not *unfair*. Unfair connotates breaking the rules or cheating, and there's nothing against the rules for making a crappy trade.

Everyone else in the league had the same chance to make the same crappy deal, so it's a fair trade - no matter how unbalanced.

[Radii]

I agree with everyone who is saying that an unbalanced trade is fine as long as there's no collusion. But, what I was saying in my first post, is that when two relatives are trading with each other in such a way that on the face of it appears to significantly improve the chances of the team that's in contention to win money, I'm at least going to question it as being collusion.

I'm assuming in this case it would stand for the reasons given above... Ward is expected to produce more, and Favre probably won't produce at the same level, but I'd still be seriously suspicious.

[HeavyReign]

The other key piece of information was before I ever played in this league I was warned to keep an eye on some of the trades done with team 3 as there have been situations like this that have come up in the past. Someone else initially challenged the trade and I agreed. The trade will stand with those who chose to comment on the deal saying that its not a trade that they would ever make but not ready to call it cheating either.

As a side note I now have a side bet with team 8 about which side of the trade will do better for the rest of the year.

[hoopsguy]

Is this a keeper league? In that case, the team that is out of it could argue that they wanted to stash Brees away for next year. He has been a productive QB in the past and Favre has almost no value as a keeper but is a better option than Brees right now.

However, if that is the logic then it is hard to understand moving an asset like Edwards.

It is hard to make a judgement on the deal without a little more information about league structure and the rest of the rosters. But as listed here this is a pretty lousy deal and as another owner I would be annoyed. The "relative" aspect would be additional salt in the wound.

[Eaglesfan27]

Seems to me it might matter what the league's rules say about trade contesting -- I've never felt comfortable intervening in what just seemed "dumb." I draw the line at collusion or cheating. To me, this trade seems perfectly defensible, I couldn't imagine casting a vote to intercede.

Agreed.

Also, I'd never play in a money league where 2 people were relatives or likely to be closer to each other than other members, unless I completely trusted them. A few years ago, I played in a league where 2 brothers made suspicious trades and they were never overturned, but I felt they were suspicious. So, I found myself another money league with guys I trusted more and dropped that league.

[Logan]

I'll grant you that an unbalanced trade sucks for the rest of the league, but unless it is cheating, it is certainly not *unfair*. Unfair connotates breaking the rules or cheating, and there's nothing against the rules for making a crappy trade.

Everyone else in the league had the same chance to make the same crappy deal, so it's a fair trade - no matter how unbalanced.

+1.

I would never play in a league that allows vetoing. It should be up to the commish to strike down any deal where there is obvious collusion, and those guys should be kicked out of the league as a result. Otherwise, you end up with a ton of shit being vetoed down just because other teams don't like the fact that one team appears to be getting better.

On the supposed "unfairness"...what seems unbalanced or unfair today could be viewed completely differently by the end of the season.

[flere-imsaho]

It's not "cheating" as I see it, but it's certainly either a) collusion, b) idiocy or c) a complete shot in the dark by Team 8. If Team 8 could come up with a very convincing explanation for why he's taking this risk, then I'd not have a problem with it. However, there are too many red flags here. And then, the real problem is that the #3 team has just, I suspect, vaulted himself into #1 contention. What's to stop him from splitting the pot 70/30 with Team 8, who got him there (if we're thinking collusion).

Also, to any objective observer, the trade's unabalanced:

Favre still gets to play the Bears, Vikings & Lions again this year, which is worth a lot of points for his owner. He's also shown a lot of consistency, from a fantasy standpoint, this year. There's no indication that he'll tank.

Brees came to life, a bit vs. Seattle, but note that the Saints only managed something like 7 first downs on 6 possessions in the 2nd half. There's something seriously wrong with the Saints this year, and I don't see it as a rebound. Maybe if they light it up today you can make that case.

Edward may come back to earth with Anderson, yes, but he's still the undisputed #1 WR there, so he'll get his touches (and your fantasy points).

Ward has to come back from injury, first of all, and his value declines as Pittsburgh go more and more run-heavy as the weather gets worse. Plus, Santonio Holmes is the big-play guy these days.

[Logan]

It's not "cheating" as I see it, but it's certainly either a) collusion,

Collusion = cheating, for the record.

Who is 8th place team's other QB after getting Brees?

[HeavyReign]

Team 8 is the acting commish for this season so this wasn't a situation where the commish could cancel the trade. His other QB is Schaub. I'll certainly have to give some thought as to whether or not to play in the league next year. The main reason for playing is that there are roughly 4 owners that really do a poor job of adjusting to the point structure used by the league so they are pretty much dead money but they also know enough not to get ripped off for the good players they do draft.

[iwillbeback]

If the trade had been made before the start of the season this could have been considered an unfair trade in reverse. Team 8 could rationalize that performance for the remainder of the season will be to predraft levels. Also Brees and Ward are done with byes while team 3 can't use either player this week.

[Warhammer]

I would not veto this trade. This is what fantasy football is all about. You try to sell a guy when he is hot, and try to pick up someone when they are not, but you expect them to play better.

This is not a blatant throw in the towel move, I can see both Brees and Ward playing better from here on out, and I have seen more and more moments of the old Favre in the last few weeks.

[Logan]

If the trade had been made before the start of the season this could have been considered an unfair trade in reverse.

Excellent point by Team 3 :).

So this guy was able to start Brees this week (solid game, 220 yards, 2 TDs/1 INT) instead of Matt Schaub (23 yards, out hurt). He wins.

[wishbone]

I think you can look at both sides and see valid reasons to make this trade. Fair enough for me.

[Neon_Chaos]

Now stop worrying about your fantasy football league and get to work on releasing FBB earlier.

:D

[k0ruptr]

Now stop worrying about your fantasy football league and get to work on releasing FBCB earlier.

:D


SO fixed.

[Mustang]

I hate vetos unless it is horribly blatant. I've seen leagues get all pissy because in their eyes, X was screwing over Y player but, in the end, Y would have had the better end of the deal by season's end.

The player with Favre and Edwards probably just thinks they have peaked and would rather have Brees and Ward. I wouldn't do the trade but, I could see why someone would do it.

[HeavyReign]

Ok here's one from my other league by two guys who work together:

Team 1 trades: Stephen Jackson, Brian Leonard
Team 2 trades: Tomlinson, Bobby Engram

Ummm...wtf?

[henry296]

Not that it matters at all, but Hines Ward has 2 TDs already today and looks to be back to full strength.

[Radii]

Looks like Braylon Edwards has 2 TDs today too!

[Izulde]

Heh, in the free espn league I'm in, it's all family members except me and another guy who are randoms... we have the top records in the league. and there was just a trade where one of the family teams traded another family team Jay Cutler.

Guess what the original family team got in return?

Nothing.

As in no player at all. I'm wondering if that's an ESPN glitch or something fishy.