Fantasy ethics question

[rhd]

Good discussion. We have the same "problem" in one of my leagues. I generally agree w the idea that trades should be vetoed only in the most extreme circumstances, like collusion. But still I think there are some rules you can implement to make the trading fairer and reduce controversies. First, of course, is to use not only salary caps but also salary minimums. Another good rule we implemented is dump notices. Everyone who dumps has to send a league-wide email of his/her intention to dump. Then there is a 2-week waiting period before they can make any trades. This gives all owners a chance to make deals for any players they want.

Personally, re: CBS's "On the Block" feature, I seldom pay much attention to it. I cant remember it ever being the start of my trade discussions w anyone. People generally list half their rosters or more as the players they're making available for trade and include only the most general details of what they're looking for. What gets my interest is a direct communication just to me of specific players of theirs for specific players of mine. Your mileage may vary. However, CBS's "trade" feature is good for this purpose and is effective for getting trade discussions started.

[cavebird]

rhd---what do the tweener teams in your league do before the trade deadline? I guess they could just all post dump notices two weeks in advance and then not dump if their team improved to the point of not dumping.

[rhd]

rhd---what do the tweener teams in your league do before the trade deadline? I guess they could just all post dump notices two weeks in advance and then not dump if their team improved to the point of not dumping.

In this particular league, the dump notices usually start coming out by late May. It's an 11-team, AL-only league and there are 6 contenders for the 4 money spots. So there are only 5 dump candidates. So most of the dumps already occurred before our deadline, which is the last Sunday after July 31. Some of the less active owners dont issue dump notices. But you mentioned a problematic issue which is that teams "on the bubble" can issue dump notices while deciding whether they want to be buyers or sellers. This happenned twice this year, and 1 team ended up being a seller and the other still is a contender. I dont see this as a major issue, but perhaps it could be.

[cavebird]

In this particular league, the dump notices usually start coming out by late May. It's an 11-team, AL-only league and there are 6 contenders for the 4 money spots. So there are only 5 dump candidates. So most of the dumps already occurred before our deadline, which is the last Sunday after July 31. Some of the less active owners dont issue dump notices. But you mentioned a problematic issue which is that teams "on the bubble" can issue dump notices while deciding whether they want to be buyers or sellers. This happenned twice this year, and 1 team ended up being a seller and the other still is a contender. I dont see this as a major issue, but perhaps it could be.

I don't think it is an issue, but it can show that the rule can be meaningless. As there is no penalty for issuing a dump notice but not dumping, everybody can give one. Sort of like putting players on waivers in early August.

[rhd]

I don't think it is an issue, but it can show that the rule can be meaningless. As there is no penalty for issuing a dump notice but not dumping, everybody can give one. Sort of like putting players on waivers in early August.

So far, I dont think people are abusing it. Only bubble teams have issued a "conditional dump" notice so far. Generally, it's been a good rule that allows all owners to conduct trade negotiations instead of just friend-trades.

[Mendoza_Line]

This may be a loophole in trading and wondered is it normal...more of a FF player myself and never seen it.
The league is a keeper (4) with no trade deadline.

Team A wants Stat X badly and has loads of Stat Y.
Approaches Team B who have Stat X but are short on Stat Y.
Team A is a contender. Team B is not.

Team A offers Player Y with Stat Y for Player X for Stat X.
They also say, that at the end of the season they will trade back Player X (after they hopefully win :-) but really regardless) AND Team B get to keep Player Y also from trade 1.

Now, if Team B are good traders, they could really work this to their advantage and everybody wins..right?

My issues though are with the ethics of it and how the deal is not transparent to others and other contenders...
What are peoples thoughts on this?
It's like loaning a player...

[mjl]

This may be a loophole in trading and wondered is it normal...more of a FF player myself and never seen it.
The league is a keeper (4) with no trade deadline.

Team A wants Stat X badly and has loads of Stat Y.
Approaches Team B who have Stat X but are short on Stat Y.
Team A is a contender. Team B is not.

Team A offers Player Y with Stat Y for Player X for Stat X.
They also say, that at the end of the season they will trade back Player X (after they hopefully win :-) but really regardless) AND Team B get to keep Player Y also from trade 1.

Now, if Team B are good traders, they could really work this to their advantage and everybody wins..right?

My issues though are with the ethics of it and how the deal is not transparent to others and other contenders...
What are peoples thoughts on this?
It's like loaning a player...

The issue of course is with "everybody wins"; presumably team A and B do but the other teams don't. It's exactly like loaning a player, which most leagues frown on, and if the trades were not being publicly connected there would be some protests about the second trade.

I am sure it would be possible to have a league that allowed this as well as PTBNLs, transfers of auction $, etc., but if there are any leagues that allow those things I'm not aware of them. I think that would be fun in principle but I suspect there are just too many ways to exploit the system to make it feasible.

[cavebird]

The return trade of Player X for nothing would be illegal in most leagues. In one of my league there is a strict rule that any keeper traded in season cannot be traded back to the team that traded him away in the following offseason, which prohibits the practice completely.

[Gregg]

This may be a loophole in trading and wondered is it normal...more of a FF player myself and never seen it.
The league is a keeper (4) with no trade deadline.

Team A wants Stat X badly and has loads of Stat Y.
Approaches Team B who have Stat X but are short on Stat Y.
Team A is a contender. Team B is not.

Team A offers Player Y with Stat Y for Player X for Stat X.
They also say, that at the end of the season they will trade back Player X (after they hopefully win :-) but really regardless) AND Team B get to keep Player Y also from trade 1.

Now, if Team B are good traders, they could really work this to their advantage and everybody wins..right?

My issues though are with the ethics of it and how the deal is not transparent to others and other contenders...
What are peoples thoughts on this?
It's like loaning a player...

Trading a player with the premeditated idea of trading the player back is collusion.

Why stop at one? Hey buddy you are out of it, "lend" me your top 6 guys and I will split the pot with you. Then we can trade back in the off season.

Bad business. Don't do it. Don't let it be allowed by anyone.

[Mithrandir]

Trading a player with the premeditated idea of trading the player back is collusion.

Why stop at one? Hey buddy you are out of it, "lend" me your top 6 guys and I will split the pot with you. Then we can trade back in the off season.

Bad business. Don't do it. Don't let it be allowed by anyone.

This.. That's bullshit.