Jump to content
NBC Sports EDGE Forums

2017 Commissioner / League Rules / League Drama


Recommended Posts

Just now, TedStriker said:

Yeah that's nonsense that just because it isn't specified in the league rules that it should be allowed. I think adding general language along the lines of "any moves deemed to be against the spirit of fielding a competitive team all season (i.e. tanking) will result in a warning and then immediate removal from the league with no refunds, if repeated" would be enough to cover any of the shenanigans that people may attempt. I wouldn't let this person get away with it in the current season and would tell him he's out if he doesn't field a full team next period.

 

 

 

"Oh so the last team got to play him with an empty roster, but now my team has to play him with a full roster? "

 

or

 

OK, I'll just cut all my good players and play scrubs.

 

 

If someone wants to be annoying, they will find a way (believe me I know). I agree though, it's BS.  If you run a serious league you need to think of all these things in the offseason. Also, not playing with jerks is a start.  On the other hand, this guy is actually trying pretty hard to make his team better for next year, so it's hard to completely blame him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 300
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I've got one I'd like some input on:

 

Small Keeper league (8) and one player who actually is in the middle but with little chance to win has basically decided to give up on the year.  Was trying to trade the farm for peoples best keepers but got impatient and is now essentially firesaleing them.  A few of the trades are sort of okay, but the last one involved him getting Polanco for JUpton, Greinke, and Smoak.  He also dealt Goldy and Donaldson for pennies.  No one seems to care even though its competitive (and probably because they all got something from him).  The players all have $ values but none really justify any of his moves objectively speaking.

 

How do you prevent something like this?  Move up the trade deadline.  Curious bc I think it's really selfish of that player.  Tanking is one thing.  But I think trading without really giving a *@#$ is wrong especially when said player is barely managing his lineups.  Thoughts?  Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Magoo said:

I've got one I'd like some input on:

 

Small Keeper league (8) and one player who actually is in the middle but with little chance to win has basically decided to give up on the year.  Was trying to trade the farm for peoples best keepers but got impatient and is now essentially firesaleing them.  A few of the trades are sort of okay, but the last one involved him getting Polanco for JUpton, Greinke, and Smoak.  He also dealt Goldy and Donaldson for pennies.  No one seems to care even though its competitive (and probably because they all got something from him).  The players all have $ values but none really justify any of his moves objectively speaking.

 

How do you prevent something like this?  Move up the trade deadline.  Curious bc I think it's really selfish of that player.  Tanking is one thing.  But I think trading without really giving a *@#$ is wrong especially when said player is barely managing his lineups.  Thoughts?  Thanks

It's hard to tell from your post what the problem is. What are "pennies"? Depending on the league rules, there could be legitimate reasons for wanting those guys off a team, in which case shame on the other teams for not beating offers of "pennies". If the team's just throwing a hissyfit for some reason, don't invite them back next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Magoo said:

I've got one I'd like some input on:

 

Small Keeper league (8) and one player who actually is in the middle but with little chance to win has basically decided to give up on the year.  Was trying to trade the farm for peoples best keepers but got impatient and is now essentially firesaleing them.  A few of the trades are sort of okay, but the last one involved him getting Polanco for JUpton, Greinke, and Smoak.  He also dealt Goldy and Donaldson for pennies.  No one seems to care even though its competitive (and probably because they all got something from him).  The players all have $ values but none really justify any of his moves objectively speaking.

 

How do you prevent something like this?  Move up the trade deadline.  Curious bc I think it's really selfish of that player.  Tanking is one thing.  But I think trading without really giving a *@#$ is wrong especially when said player is barely managing his lineups.  Thoughts?  Thanks

 

I guess I would need to know what each trade is, the player values and the reasoning behind them.

 

Upton, Greinke & Smoak for Polonco, in and of itself is vetoable.  Now, if you tell me Greinke & Upton would cost him $35 each next year and Polonco, for some reason is $1, then it makes a lot more sense.

 

If that's the case, then it's a problem with your keeper rules.  Also, as you suggest, you should probably have a much earlier trade deadline.

Edited by 89Topps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Magoo said:

I've got one I'd like some input on:

 

Small Keeper league (8) and one player who actually is in the middle but with little chance to win has basically decided to give up on the year.  Was trying to trade the farm for peoples best keepers but got impatient and is now essentially firesaleing them.  A few of the trades are sort of okay, but the last one involved him getting Polanco for JUpton, Greinke, and Smoak.  He also dealt Goldy and Donaldson for pennies.  No one seems to care even though its competitive (and probably because they all got something from him).  The players all have $ values but none really justify any of his moves objectively speaking.

 

How do you prevent something like this?  Move up the trade deadline.  Curious bc I think it's really selfish of that player.  Tanking is one thing.  But I think trading without really giving a *@#$ is wrong especially when said player is barely managing his lineups.  Thoughts?  Thanks

 

Move up the deadline

 

Add more keepers.- (This is an underrated one.  If you add a lot more keepers, then players like Smoak and Greinke aren't worthless to non contending teams)

 

Make the buy in more

 

Incentivize placing higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

 

Move up the deadline

 

Add more keepers.- (This is an underrated one.  If you add a lot more keepers, then players like Smoak and Greinke aren't worthless to non contending teams)

 

Make the buy in more

 

Incentivize placing higher.

Thx for the replies

 

$300 budget, Goldy at $42 traded for boegarts at $19 and Domingo $1. But then he just flipped Boegarts for Bundy and Starlin Castro which makes no sense.

 

Polanco was $11 and Grenke $7, Jup $10 and Smoak $1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Magoo said:

Thx for the replies

 

$300 budget, Goldy at $42 traded for boegarts at $19 and Domingo $1. But then he just flipped Boegarts for Bundy and Starlin Castro which makes no sense.

 

Polanco was $11 and Grenke $7, Jup $10 and Smoak $1.

 

At least the Goldy trade makes sense in that he's saving salary.

 

Having a hard time making sense of that Polonco trade though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 89Topps said:

 

At least the Goldy trade makes sense in that he's saving salary.

 

Having a hard time making sense of that Polonco trade though.

 

According to the owner that traded Polanco, there were even more ridiculous offers that he turned down bc he felt bad for the guy. Doe Owner apparently got frustrated that the Polanco owner wouldn't budge with Springer. 

 

It's all legal and I know he can manage his team how he wants, but it just feels wrong that he can alter the league balance so much.  Frustrating.

Edited by Magoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean

2 minutes ago, Magoo said:

 

According to the owner that made the polanco trade, there were even more ridiculous offers that he turned down bc he felt bad for the guy.  He apparently got frustrated that the Polanco owner wouldn't budge with Springer. 

 

It's all legal and I know he can manage his team how he wants, but it just feels wrong that he can alter the league balance so much.  Frustrating.

Do you think he's just dumping his roster or is he actually trying to rebuild for next year? However you answer that question for yourself should determine the way you want to move forward.

If he's just roster dumping to be a jackass, then do something about it. If he's trying to rebuild but you just disagree with his moves, then I think you should just worry about your own team and/or try to get some players from him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fiveohnine said:

I mean

Do you think he's just dumping his roster or is he actually trying to rebuild for next year? However you answer that question for yourself should determine the way you want to move forward.

If he's just roster dumping to be a jackass, then do something about it. If he's trying to rebuild but you just disagree with his moves, then I think you should just worry about your own team and/or try to get some players from him.

I think he's doing both and basically wants to fully check out for the year and make all the deals he can. He was frustrated people weren't trading with him and then this ensued.

 

As an example, why would he trade Boegarts for Bundy and Castro if he just traded Goldy for Boegarts?  To save salary?  He already has like 15 potential keepers (all kind of meh) and they are all on his bench.

 

He was also about 400 IP behind everyone else before this started.  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

Not lame or close to cheating. They need to do a better job of preparing their own team. Waiting until the last second to make a move is their fault. Same way people grab new closers even though they don't need them. Just to stop another team from picking him up. Don't blame others for your team. I play in some 2 start qb leagues and sometimes a greedy owner that wants to keep loading up on rb/wr and then owners will draft a 4th qb all in a row to prevent a owner from his 2nd qb since all gone in this format. Blame the owner that got stuck with one.

 

It is actually clear cheating by ESPN's rules.  And rostering players so your opponent can't have them is different than picking up and dropping players solely for the purpose of putting them on waivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

If nobody is trading with him then maybe he felt this was the best he could do. I am in a keeper league where half the people wont trade..Yet they complain about other trades people make.

 

We all trade pretty regularly, especially in the off-season.  I get your point though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your only purpose is to cause a bunch of guys to be on waivers Sunday morning then yeah, that is obviously abuse/cheating. But adding and holding guys isn't "cycling". I think that's an important distinction, since like I said there are already limits on how may of each position you can hold anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

I never quoted you...You quoted me 1st when I was talking about the two people with the 1b and qb stuff. My post fit what they were talking about

 

The post that started the QB discussion was beakmans, where he said he essentially cycled QBs through waivers so his opponent couldn't pick them up.

 

That is cheating at worst, and bush league at best.

 

If that's not what you meant by "the QB thing" in your post, then ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

The 1b guy did not drop all of his also in my post.

 

I have no problem with putting them all on waivers also if the system allows them to do it. Don't care that a public espn league says it is cheating. If they really cared they would fix the rule/system so you had to hold guys once you picked them up. If not I am all for doing what you can to help your own chances to win. 

 

Cycling, or impeding is against Yahoo rules too.  Not sure about others, but I assume they have some kind of language about it in their rules.

 

If it's not specifically mentioned as illegal, then I'd still say it's pretty bush league.  But, whatever, I'm not in your league and you're not in mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

I don't play public leagues but would have no problem doing this in them. If they say it is against the rules then they need to put something in place to stop it. Is espn or yahoo going to come into each public league and somehow reverse all the moves so they are not on waivers? lol. I can see how some people that are not into fantasy as much or as competitive see it as bush league but in my leagues we all do whatever we can to win. If it was illegal then our system would not be allowed to even have it happen in the first place. 

 

Here is another smart thing to do imo. Years ago I played in a weekly league and rosters would lock for the week 5 minutes before the first game of the week. I would drop 3-4 guys 6-7 minutes before the week locked to grab different guys for that week knowing nobody else will be on top of it that quick. Once the new week locked all players were FA again so I grabbed all of them back 30 seconds later when the week locked. Some could call that bush league also I guess but I call it being good at fantasy.

 

Well, if that's how you and your league mates like to play, then more power to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dodgers said:

If nobody is trading with him then maybe he felt this was the best he could do. I am in a keeper league where half the people wont trade..Yet they complain about other trades people make.

 

I'm in a keeper league like this, too. Guys offer up rental players for keepers at the trade deadline but no one responds. When someone does, they cry about the trade that was made. This league had one trade vetoed and another one that was griped about vehemently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Flyman75 said:

 

I'm in a keeper league like this, too. Guys offer up rental players for keepers at the trade deadline but no one responds. When someone does, they cry about the trade that was made. This league had one trade vetoed and another one that was griped about vehemently. 

That sucks. "This is the best offer I got" should always be a legitimate defense for a trade, provided you told everybody you were looking for offers. I have to say, though, if reasonable trades are getting vetoed, I understand people's reluctance to try to piece together a deal. Maybe that tendency needs to be addressed in the offseason... is it a commissioner doing the vetoing or a league vote?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Hanghow said:

That sucks. "This is the best offer I got" should always be a legitimate defense for a trade, provided you told everybody you were looking for offers. I have to say, though, if reasonable trades are getting vetoed, I understand people's reluctance to try to piece together a deal. Maybe that tendency needs to be addressed in the offseason... is it a commissioner doing the vetoing or a league vote?

 

League vote, which may change next year...or may go to a majority vote given privately to the commish rather than Yahoo's required 4 votes given anonymously. The Yahoo system is a joke, but giving the commish all the veto power is a bad idea, imho. Gives the commish too much power...and can put a good, honest commish in a bad spot if you have a divided league.

 

The veto this year was the first one we've had in a few years...I can think of only two in our seven years of existence. The one that was griped about (but not vetoed) was a case of a rebuilding team wanting to trade a star player with an expiring keeper status. He offered him up to the league as a rental player for a keeper, and finally got an offer 2-3 days later. He took it and a few owners griped, fussing about collusion and calling the two owners "shady". Finally one of them posted screenshots of their conversation leading up to the creation of the trade offer and the agreement to that trade, which proved no collusion and nothing shady took place. That seemed to shut everyone up. I'm pretty sure one of them won't be back next year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Flyman75 said:

 

League vote, which may change next year...or may go to a majority vote given privately to the commish rather than Yahoo's required 4 votes given anonymously. The Yahoo system is a joke, but giving the commish all the veto power is a bad idea, imho. Gives the commish too much power...and can put a good, honest commish in a bad spot if you have a divided league.

 

The veto this year was the first one we've had in a few years...I can think of only two in our seven years of existence. The one that was griped about (but not vetoed) was a case of a rebuilding team wanting to trade a star player with an expiring keeper status. He offered him up to the league as a rental player for a keeper, and finally got an offer 2-3 days later. He took it and a few owners griped, fussing about collusion and calling the two owners "shady". Finally one of them posted screenshots of their conversation leading up to the creation of the trade offer and the agreement to that trade, which proved no collusion and nothing shady took place. That seemed to shut everyone up. I'm pretty sure one of them won't be back next year. 

Thx for chiming in. The more I think about it it's probably worth letting go.

 

I suppose it's the lack of patience and sophistication of the trading team. If it were me, I'd take an offer I got for a "rental" and let the other teams know to get some bidding war action.

 

also in my league the top guys aren't rentals but rather not uber cheap. In an 8 team league the top guys are ******** gold. To get rid of them for a "kind of fair" return is so stupid that I cannot believe someone would be short sighted. 

 

Once someone starts tanking though they lose their focus. 

Edited by Magoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Flyman75 said:

 

I'm in a keeper league like this, too. Guys offer up rental players for keepers at the trade deadline but no one responds. When someone does, they cry about the trade that was made. This league had one trade vetoed and another one that was griped about vehemently. 

How late is your deadline?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...