What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

How lopsided is this trade, if at all? (1 Viewer)

greedygoat

greedygoat

Footballguy
Non-keeper Roto League. Last place team sends Lincecum to 6th place team for the 3 named players.

Standings

1. Teabaggers 123.0

2. Charlie 111.0

3. Guru 96.0

4. CosJobs 89.0

5. RatedR 85.0

6. NJG 84.0

7. KOP 72.0

8. TU 64.5

9. Turds 62.0

10. SK 60.0

11. BJ 53.5

12. BBW 52.0

13. GM 50.0

14. IDBNY 48.0

What are your opinions on this trade?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is not nearly enough information here to give you a solid opinion.................BUT

1) Does your league have any trade rules?

If redraft leagues allow trades, they have to have good rules about what trades are legal and When (maybe even between which teams)

2) Is there ANY incentive for the last place team to move up in the standings?

One way to handle this if this is an ongoing league is to have the draft order for the next season start with the first team that finishes out of the money and go from there - so if you pay four teams out of 14, the draft order next year would be 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,4,3,2,1

That way the teams on the bottom have a reason to keep fighting all year long - and then if this trade would actually improve the total points of the last place team, it would be a viable trade

Bottom line = if you don't have specific rules against, why wouldn't this trade go through?

(even if it seems a little.......um questionable)

PS - your league could always submit to TRADE COURT (at www.fantasybaseball.com)

 
Captain Hook said:
There is not nearly enough information here to give you a solid opinion.................BUT1) Does your league have any trade rules? If redraft leagues allow trades, they have to have good rules about what trades are legal and When (maybe even between which teams)2) Is there ANY incentive for the last place team to move up in the standings?One way to handle this if this is an ongoing league is to have the draft order for the next season start with the first team that finishes out of the money and go from there - so if you pay four teams out of 14, the draft order next year would be 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,4,3,2,1That way the teams on the bottom have a reason to keep fighting all year long - and then if this trade would actually improve the total points of the last place team, it would be a viable tradeBottom line = if you don't have specific rules against, why wouldn't this trade go through?(even if it seems a little.......um questionable)PS - your league could always submit to TRADE COURT (at www.fantasybaseball.com)
Click to expand...
Thanks for your response. I wasn't questioning if it should be allowed to go through. I've never been one to veto trades, unless collusion can be proved, and I don't think that's even an option in this league. I was only wondering if other people thought it was as questionable as I do. 1. The only "trade rule" is that we cannot make trades past 8/14, that's it.2. There is no incentive for the last place team to move up unless he can move up all the way to 4th place. We pay out the top 4 places and next years draft order is random.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Terrible trade. Makes no sense whatsoever. Perhaps the guy who gave Lincecum could stop by for comment.

 
Bobcat10 said:
Wow that last place team that has Lincecum must be HORRIBLE.

Even so, joke trade.
Click to expand...
Last place teams roster after the trade looks like:Actives

J. Varitek C

N. Swisher 1B

A. Callaspo 2B

D. Wright 3B

J. Hairston SS

A. Hill MI

C. Pena CI

M. Bradley OF

M. Cameron OF

J. Drew OF

J. Rivera OF

V. Wells OF

H. Kendrick U

D. Uggla U

M. DiFelice P

K. Lohse P

H. Okajima P

R. Ramirez P

S. Richmond P

C. Sabathia P

J. Saunders P

J. Weaver P

M. Wuertz P

Reserves

G. Soto C

W. Aybar 3B

J. Giambi CI

R. Sweeney U

B. Arroyo P

E. Chavez OF

B. McCarthy P

 
SofaKings said:
Thankfully I haven't paid my entrance fee yet.
Click to expand...
No disrespect intended, but currently in 10th place with 60 points, I doubt this Lincecum trade would be the reason for you finishing out of the money....
Code: 
1. Teabaggers 123.0 2. Charlie 111.0 3. Guru 96.0 4. CosJobs 89.0 5. RatedR 85.0 6. NJG 84.0 7. KOP 72.0 8. TU 64.5 9. Turds 62.0 10. SK 60.0 11. BJ 53.5 12. BBW 52.0 13. GM 50.0 14. IDBNY 48.0
 
this is a league i commish.....its tough proving collusion in an open trading league. either i allow every trade or i can approve or we vote. but who am i to determine how other people value players? this is a real slippery slope and i expect integrity from all those who play. i can ask for the logic behind the deal, but we all have our own favorites. i am not supporting this deal, but lincecum has what, 9 starts left? the last place team has no reason to deal, but does that mean he just stop? i am near the bottom, but still dealing..............in fact, i traded josh hamilton when he was 4 weeks away from returning.

:yawn:

 
greedygoat said:
SofaKings said:
Thankfully I haven't paid my entrance fee yet.
Click to expand...
No disrespect intended, but currently in 10th place with 60 points, I doubt this Lincecum trade would be the reason for you finishing out of the money....
Code: 
1. Teabaggers 123.0 2. Charlie 111.0 3. Guru 96.0 4. CosJobs 89.0 5. RatedR 85.0 6. NJG 84.0 7. KOP 72.0 8. TU 64.5 9. Turds 62.0 10. SK 60.0 11. BJ 53.5 12. BBW 52.0 13. GM 50.0 14. IDBNY 48.0
Click to expand...
That is some terrific insight there.
 
Update

With the 6th place (now 5th) team acquiring Lincecum for a song. I felt my money position finish could be jeopardized.

I think it was improbable that I could crack the top two, even with newly returned Carlos Q and soon to return Jose Reyes on my roster.

Sofa on the other hand needed to roll the dice to have even a remote shot to finish in the money.

So I sent him Carlos Q, Jose Reyes, Latos and Holland for Pujols and Rodney.

I freely admit that at current levels, I got the better of it. BUT- with those players he now has a much better chance to make up ground and finish in the money, if they can return to form. Pujols is already in form and would not give much of a chance to improve his standing staying pat. Its a gamble, but it does provide him an opportunity he did not have before the trade.

If the Lincecum deal had not gone thru, I would have stayed pat. But with a guy three points behind me getting Lincy for a song, I felt I had to make a move to try and stave him off.

Our commish seems much more upset over this deal than the Lincecum deal and I think it is MUCH more balanced.

If the commish or league thinks it is collusion/unfair, I am fine with revocation and I will not whine or complain. All I ask is that our current needs/standings be taken into account as to why the deal was made. And I would appreciate (but not demand) that that standard be applied to other trades before this one.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So I sent him Carlos Q, Jose Reyes, Latos and Holland for Pujols and Rodney.

this is by far worse than the Lincecum deal. The owner that dealt Lincecum is a roto novice and huge Red Sox fan who jumped on getting jd drew.

i expect more from people that actually know the game. dealing the best player in baseball and a solid closer for holland, who is a pig, reyes, who wont see the field again in 2009, latos, who is being shut down after august and quentin, who is just returning from a lis franc fracture reeks.

justify all you want, but this is just dirty. like i said, hope you threw in some lube cause sk will be sore without it after what you did here.

:yes:

 
Chemical X said:
So I sent him Carlos Q, Jose Reyes, Latos and Holland for Pujols and Rodney.

this is by far worse than the Lincecum deal. The owner that dealt Lincecum is a roto novice and huge Red Sox fan who jumped on getting jd drew.

i expect more from people that actually know the game. dealing the best player in baseball and a solid closer for holland, who is a pig, reyes, who wont see the field again in 2009, latos, who is being shut down after august and quentin, who is just returning from a lis franc fracture reeks.

justify all you want, but this is just dirty. like i said, hope you threw in some lube cause sk will be sore without it after what you did here.

:goodposting:
Click to expand...
What crystal ball do you have that says Reyes won't be back? The day of the trade everything I read indicated about a week or two before his return. If you think it is dirty, then reverse it. I told you I was fine with that. And while you are insistent on questioning my integrity, I have said I do not question yours. You said you do not question how others evaluate players- I guess except when it comes to SK.I liked the deal and SK liked the deal. So we did it.

You and one other league member voiced opposition. That makes it 2-2.

And I think it was FAR more fair than the Lincecum deal.

 
The original Lincecum deal paved the way for this one, like it or not. Fantasy experience and team rooting interest are irrelevant to the equation. If anything, it should fall on the shoulders of the commish to protect the novice from being taken advantage of. Furthermore, it should be the role of commish to intervene when the league is clamoring for a review of the trade. There is no way in the world to justify the original Lincecum trade from any standpoint. Once it hit the tape and league members objected, a league vote at a very minimum should have been ordered.

That said, it forced the hand of others trying to compete for money in this league. And in my opinion, the trade involving Pujols is less egregious than the one involving Lincecum. Quentin was in the running for MVP last year before getting hurt and could be a huge factor down the stretch. Reyes was a top 5 pick in ALL leagues this year and the Mets have been vague all season long on his progression. It's not like the player trading him away had any better insight to his return than the player acquiring him. Latos has been sharp since joining the majors.

Since the first trade was left to stand, this trade should also stand. It sucks that the first one was allowed, but coming down on the owners for making the second one in light of the first doesn't make any sense and at least with the second, I can see value going in both directions. I can't see ANYTHING in the first that resembles value moving both ways. Not at all.

 
there's no way this deal is worse than the Lincecum deal. it's literally impossible to find a legitimate reason for the Lincecum trade to have occurred. this trade is just bad, and there's nothing wrong with that.

ETA: also 99% of Sox fans hate Drew, so i find this justification unconvincing as well as irrelevant.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top