Commish Question1

I have a couple of friends trying to squeeze a trade in before the deadline. One is completely out of the leagues running and the other is one game out of the playoffs. I rejected the following trade:

Team in playoff hunt sends
Zeke Elliot + Golden Tate

Last place team sends
Kareem Hunt + Tyreek Hill + Nick Chubb

By my leagues scoring system
Hunt > Zeke by a little
Hill > Tate by a whole lot
And I can’t fathom why Chubb would be thrown into an already uneven trade.

Needless to say the 2 players aren’t too happy and say I’m running a dictatorship. In my opinion trades between eliminated and in the hunt teams is the biggest SCUMBAG move you can make in Fantasy football.

Am I right here or as commissioner should I just let everyone do what they want?

Thats a complete bullshit trade.
good on ya for rejecting

Looks like potential collusion to me, they tried masking it by sending Zeke to the losing team while sending everything of value to the other team. BUT remember KC has a bye in week 12, so maybe the other team desperately wanted to avoid the bye :man_shrugging:

Trading with a team out of it is fine(maybe questionable), as I wouldn’t want to prevent someone wanting to play spoiler and making a trade that actually attempts to improve their team.

Did the rest of the league have a vote or just you saying no? I would say if everyone in the league said no then the trade could be vetoed.

If in my league my commissioner made the decision to veto a trade by himself he wouldn’t be commissioner anymore, because it looks like your looking out for your own interests!

Thanks! It wasn’t put up to a league vote our league is commissioner approval. However I’m also eliminated from playoff contention and have way too much integrity to do anything looking our for my own interests. I’ve always made it clear that I would approve just about any trade other than an eliminated team unloading their best players to a potential playoff team, like this.

In a dynasty league I guess all bets are off but in this case I honestly can’t believe an owner who really can’t benefit from a trade in any way would make one. I am out and would reject anyone who sent me a trade offer. No league should be decided by week 10 sweetheart trades IMO.

Redraft league? Yea this one doesn’t smell right - why an eliminated team is making a move to begin with is a bit strange.

As a commish, I typically force the league to vote on these things, one way or the other - being impartial is difficult, and if the league was aware of this, i’m guessing you’d be in the majority as far as your opinion of the deal

Since you made it clear about the trades you would not approve, I believe you definitely did the right thing.
With that said, I hope you made your reasoning very clear when or before you rejected this trade.

1 Like

I agree that in the interests of league democracy and being absolutely fair etc this should of been held while the whole league, bar the two trading parties, voted. If the outcome wasn’t a unanimous veto i would be shocked and as you have said that these types of trades would be vetoed then it’s fair to me as you’ve already stated the rule prior to the trade.

If they are kicking off, in a redraft league with no keepers or anything like that to muddle it just ask them to logically explain how the trade is fair, balanced and not collusion that should quiet the complaints i would think

I believe I did:

  1. I told them I don’t like trades involving teams out of contention
  2. I sent them the point averages I used for my stat comparisons. It came out that Hunt was the most valuable, Zeke and Hill were about a wash and Hill was WAYY better than Tate in fact Even Chubb was almost a wash with Tate.
  3. I showed them a fantasy trade analyzer that also agreed with my findings.

I also told them I would approve Hunt OR Hill and Chubb for Zeke and Tate and they said no. In that case Hunt/Chubb is slightly better than Zeke/Tate and Zeke/Tate is slightly better than Hill/Chubb.

I looked at this carefully (I think). I couldn’t find one reason why this was a good trade.

i’d just be super transparent with the rest of the league - depending on your platform make a message board post “ATTENTION: TRADE VETO, list the reasons why” so that everyone is on the same page.

OK league vote seems to be the what everyone likes. I am dead against changing policies in season. I don’t think that is fair and everyone knew the rules coming in. My concerns with league votes are:

  1. In this league I feel all trades would be vetoed.
  2. Depending on the standings, some players may not care to visit the site and vote so crappy trades like this could sneak through.
  3. There can still be collusion.

I know nobody hear knows me but I’m very honest. I’ve been playing fantasy football for over 25 years and making a trade when I’m out has never crossed my mind nor has trading for the worst teams best players. I get pissed when I hear guys even talking about it. To me it’s bullshit.

Why they are out of contention completely. Lose all tiebreakers, they have no chance. the bye can’t hurt them now.

I get where you’re coming from, and honestly it’s a “read the room” situation. If the rest of the league is comfortable with the format, then do your thing. If those two guys are the only two unhappy with it, then it’s further proof of collusion.

I’ve had one trade vetoe’d in three years in this current league, and in our 12 year league, we’ve actually never had one vetoed, but we have league votes.

So there are folks in this thread who actually think this trade is a good one? Some folks have no issues with guys who have no chance to win making trades that don’t even upgrade their squads? This seems odd to me. Tell me nobody actually tries these tactics, it’s not like we’re playing for millions of dollars here.

I don’t think ANYONE here thought the trade was fair, I think we were just trying to help him out in terms of keeping the league from seeing the veto as anything other than preserving the fairness.

Got it, thanks! I do agree with that. Just wondering if in addition everyone agrees this is a lopsided trade that makes no sense for the last place team to make.

nah, if the team is out of it and it’s a redraft league, then he shouldn’t be trading marquee players to a playoff team for pennies on the dollar. That’s my opinion…

I hear that point and just to clarify my view, with regards to league vote. As you have already established a rule against this type of trade, which is so one sided it’s absurd that they thought it would get through and it should be commissioner veto only. All leagues should be commissioner veto only as league wide votes will cause rage vetos etc which ruin leagues.

The use of a league vote is when the trading parties want to challenge a commissioner vetoed trade, even though we all know the majority of any league will block this but there may be some commissioner’s out there that will abuse their powers or miss trades like this or misread a trade as uneven etc so a option to have a league vote should be there for absolution if nothing else for the parties involved. Of course it is moot here as you have a rule in place anyway that blocks out of contention teams trading but I am fully against every league owner having a vote on every trade as it leads to frequent vetos. I fully agree with you and the block of the trade

1 Like

This is why i like having money back for winner of the loser bracket, or an embarrassing punishment for the bottom place team (one league I’m in you have to sing the national anthem to start the next draft). That way people out of contention won’t consider colluding.

1 Like

we’re trying to implement the grossest last place punishment in our league (we run a football and hockey league with the same guys) and so far what we’ve got is that all 9 teams ahead of last place bring 1 pube… yes pube. And they have to chug a beer with them in it.

#PUBECHUG has become a thing in our group text and it’s freaking gross enough that I don’t want to finish last.