How to curb dump deals

[Big Tymer]

Not at all a fair analogy as you have paying customers here who are spending a lot of money to go to a game and see a good product. Tanking IMO is not something that can be openly done without fear of litigation.

[TopChuckie]

Not at all a fair analogy as you have paying customers here who are spending a lot of money to go to a game and see a good product. Tanking IMO is not something that can be openly done without fear of litigation.

Based on that you think not at all a fair analogy? Take paying to go to games completely out of the equation and just think about a fan sitting at home rooting for his team to make the playoffs, no financial investment necessary for that guy to be bummed and annoyed if his team is playing golf the first weekend of the playoffs because some other team laid down against the rival. I'm not talking about the current LeBron James scenario, "I paid to see the best players and you're sitting them."

Plus, most of us have financial investment in our fantasy teams as well, not that that is a driving factor in our emotions over this, but neither do I think we as NFL fans allow our emotions about our team's season be affected by the money we spent. I am just as bummed if the Steelers don't make the playoffs in a season I watch every game at home versus a season I pay to go to a game or two.

Also, as a fan of the last place team, I might actually be ok if they lose "on purpose" to get the better pick in the draft, even if I paid to go see that game, because I realize it's what is best for my team's future, but that doesn't mean I think it's right, or is good for the game or the league.

Point is, money doesn't have to have anything to do with what I'm talking about in either the real or fantasy world.

[Big Tymer]

Tell that to David Stern who fined the Spurs heavily this year for benching their studs.

[Grinch]

Bottom line---keeper leagues = dump trades. If you don't like it play in a redraft league.

[bryanbutler]

Or institute sensible rules regarding dump trades.

yeah, this is the answer i think. don't make the rules too draconian, but try to limit the crazy unbalanced dump trades.

even better, institute rules that reward those that don't dump as much as you can. for some, that reward might not be enough and they'll still dump, but it can make a difference in some cases.

[The Dane]

yeah, this is the answer i think. don't make the rules too draconian, but try to limit the crazy unbalanced dump trades.

even better, institute rules that reward those that don't dump as much as you can. for some, that reward might not be enough and they'll still dump, but it can make a difference in some cases.

This always seems a little crazy, a little arbitrary to me. What is a sensible amount of dump trading to you is likely not the same as it is to me. We can decide as a group what is "sensible" and that is merely a gauge of the mood at that time and place and what we agree on is not always fair. For example, is the sensible amount agreed upon merely the middle where everyone is miserable the same amount, or is it a number that most people actually want?

For me, I want zero dump deals. Any restriction on dump deals means the rules have had too much of a role in determining the winner. If I roster a team that is in first until the last day, and I get overtaken by a dude that received a huge dump on deadline, then so be it. As long as I was able to deal fairly and I chose not to, then the win is his. I'm not upset, even a little. But, some people are VERY hurt by this, I understand that. So...

I'm actually okay with some restrictions. No dumps until May or June is reasonable. Some sort of cap is reasonable (although I think by the trade deadline, there should be no cap).

I care more about fair trades and equitable trades than I do dump trades. It's part of the game as far as I'm concerned. Not liking dump trades is like saying you like football, but you want to curb passing downfield.

[bryanbutler]

well, all rules might seem "arbitrary" by some measure. but most would agree that you need them. you're right that we all probably have a different threshold of what we think is sensible though.

i don't think any of us are actually that far from what you say in the rest of your post. put some reasonable limits on things, like caps, or even TC's "finchers" or whatever, and maybe some rewards like inverse minor league draft order (starting after the money spots). i don't think anybody has said that we should outlaw dump trades altogether. it's a viable way to try to improve your team. and in fact even objectively *defining* a dump trade is not really possible, so it'd be nigh-on impossible to simply disallow them. just try to curb the extremes (dumping before the season begins, collusion, extremely lopsided trades, etc.).

your last analogy is perhaps the worst yet in this thread full of terrible analogies, however...

[Pauly]

Bump. I just re-read this whole thread and it is really a good one. The reason I looked it up is because after 3 years in an NL keeper league with the extremely questionable, "any non-expiring player you trade for you are forced to keep rule" I finally spoke up for change (it is a long-time league and I didnt want to make a speech until I was established and not the new guy). Plus, I am sick as hell of this damn rule!

Anyway, this thread gave me a good amount of ideas to pitch and hopefully they dont fall on deaf ears. It's a good tool for anyone who might need it once you wade through and pick out what you need. Thanks, 'pen!

[Lucky]

Just in case I haven't mentioned it this year (as opposed to every other year), you cannot stop terrible dump deals.* There will always be a way around any rule you make, leaving you with owners voting to veto, acrimony, riots, etc.

*Owners X and Y say their late-July deal isn't a dump trade, but to help each team this year? Okay. All deals after a certain date require that the players involved be released at the end of the year.