I am not concerned about this trade specifically, as it doesn't effect my chances looking up from the cellar, but I don't remember ever being able to trade players for future picks. I don't think it sets a good precedent for the current year...and it also could potentially create logistical problems going forward. On the first point, regardless where I am in the standings, I still want to put a competitive team out there each week. If I have the opportunity though to build for next year, I can tear apart my team, and be a walkover for the remainder of my schedule. It's not fair for the teams I already played when I was at full strength or those teams that don't have me on the schedule moving forward. In a league where there is only 10-12 teams if half the teams decide to be sellers each year, there really aren't very many active managers remaining. Each year will come down to who has assembled the best super squad. Allowing such a system really lessens the importance of the new waiver system (and allows for it's manipulation by trading the top waiver position for future picks), and a good draft. Taking it a step further, the managers who have compiled these super squads can then trade these players again in the off-season (to those teams wanting for keepers) making it a zero sum transaction for them. On the logistical front, who is to say the two managers that entered into these trades will be back the following year? Is it fair to saddle these trades to new, incoming managers? If this is how it's going to be going forward, I think it should be brought to the league prior to the season. If everybody agrees to such a format, so be it, but I think all teams should at least have a say. Again, I'm saying this from the perspective of a manager that may benefit from a fire sale more than any other this season.
Stopped reading at "logistical". I nominate Chris Jent as league historian and guardian of the hall of records.
It's a keeper league. How can you have a keeper league without allowing draft pick trades? We have done it in baseball for years and years, and it should be no different here. If a manager feels unable to compete, he should have the chance to improve for the future. Likewise, if someone thinks they have a shot this year, they should be allowed to sacrifice future chances to make a good run now. I remember trading Tim Lincecum back in the day for a draft pick upgrade in baseball, and there have been many other similar deals made involving picks in subsequent years. That's all part of the appeal. If you can't trade for the future when your team is suffering, what's the point of having a keeper league at all?
There's some difference between a 7-keeper baseball league and a 1-keeper football league. I'm not saying that we should or shouldn't allow the trading of next season's draft picks, but I don't think that the keeper idea necessitates allowing those trades or that it would be invalidated without doing so.
Anyways, don't think I am quitting. I'm still putting in waiver requests, will still start my best lineup, etc. My team is one of if not the lowest scoring teams even with McCoy on my team, so why not look ahead and take advantage for next year? McCoy was really my only big time player to trade, and I traded him for what I got him for. I guess I could have asked for more, but Fade was the first and only one to offer a pick, which is what I've been asking for. I understand both sides, I still don't have a proven keeper for next year so I might have to use this extra pick FOR a keeper from someone else. This draft just didn't work out this year for Chalupa Batman and McCoy was not going to magically save my team. If you ever see me quit during a season, well that would be a first. Never have done that, never will. I've played in this league for years as well as the baseball one and I never once ignored my team halfway through.
Guys, I'm not going to start questioning trades, even though that is kind of a crappy trade and we do not have rules in this league that allow you to trade draft picks mid-season like this. However, on the same note we don't have rules against it and we do it in the other leagues, though those leagues have a more robust keeper system - this is more of a franchise tag type system. That being said, LH and Fade have always been great/honorable competitors in these leagues - though Fade is just reeling after being crushed this past week by yours truly (still enjoy taking it to Fade, almost better than winning the leagues). Moving forward, I have had a couple people suggest since we are about to go past the half way point we get rid of the waiver system (as all the main pickups have been picked), since it has been a pain in the butt. However, we need everyone to agree, cause I will do it either way............
But you didn't want Rodgers, Hawkins, and Gates for Newton, Brown, and McCoy?! Everyone here that bombed on me for the baseball trade better hush up, with this one goin thru.
Seems to me a trade deadline at week 6 would cut down on the super team concept as pretty much everyone is still in it. Do we have a current trade deadline?
Again, I'm not concerned about Fade or LH as quality managers (which both have shown over time)...nor the particulars of this trade. I was just speaking to the idea of players for picks MIDSEASON. Adding that wrinkle has the ability to change the entire league in big ways going forward (while, comparatively, the same such trades in the OFF-SEASON wouldn't seem to have nearly the same effects). As others have mentioned this is not really a true keeper league. The same fire sale concept couldn't - or likely, wouldn't - happen in the current baseball format b/c the number of keepers needed from season to season wouldn't allow a manager to liquidate their roster. Here, there is little incentive for bad teams to keep any talent around, save one 'keeper,' if the alternative is the ability to accumulate draft picks for next year. Just food for thought.
Good idea. Not sure on the exact week, but some deadline would serve to limit the number of sellers (with more teams still in contention). Probably best we're getting this discussion out of the way now..if this same McCoy trade went down with a week or so to go in the season, I can imagine there would have been some unhappy contending teams.
I vote YES to eliminating the waiver wire system, it's too much of a pain in the ass for the commish. And I vote YES to a trade deadline. Like, this weekend?
Yeah, I regret that one. I really thought Cam was going to explode and Rodgers looked like chit at that time.
While we're all complaining about rule changes, McCoy trades and trading picks out of nowhere I'd like to remind everyone that I traded Lesean McCoy late last year for Hillis or Cj2K and Austin I think (I forget) in attempt to try and knockoff some playoff bound teams. I was trying to be a good sport and compete. Little did I know trading McCoy then would comeback and bite me in the butt a full year later... Give me my cookie.
I'd vote yes to get rid of the waiver system. Too much to manage. Too slow to pick up players. And while it does advantage the worst teams, it doesn't seem to have helped all that much. There are slim pickings. Jennings is a rare exception to the rule. I can go either way, but if a vote, I'd vote to kill it. I'd also vote for a trade deadline after next week because if I was eliminated, I'd unload all of my players for picks. Why not. It makes good business sense to get rid of everyone. And that would not be the best indicator of who should win the league. It would be a meat market. Do teams suffer the following year, no doubt, but I think not much as I would take any picks just to get rid of my players. And that concentrates all of the players into the playoff teams, and think is less representative of who should really win, which is having a good draft and some team management.
LH, I agree to an extent. There are rarely trades these leagues, and when there are, there's a ton of back and forth as to the fairness of it. While I think the trades should rarely be struck down (and only rarely they are), it's still entertaining to hear people belly-ache about it. Anyhow, in a league with one keeper, I do think a trade deadline is one solution. Another could be just to eliminate in-season trades for draft picks. If we went the trade deadline route, it would likely end the season for a team suddenly in need of a replacing a star player after injury (though they may be screwed regardless). If someone loses one of their top producers after a trade deadline, they would be limited to a pretty shallow FA pool or their own roster depth. Without a trade deadline, in a league with total strangers, there'd still be the opportunity for collusion, but I think everybody in this league is comfortable enough with everybody else that such a trade wouldn't go down (and as mentioned above, there'd be enough b****ing if there was a wonky trade to eventually block it). In the end, I'm good with either route.
