Can I post--Talk about Roto League Collusion?

I was on vacation last week and just got back today.

My league had a trade last week that, well looked obviously like collusion, it was dissaproved after being approved.

The two owner's than modified the trade, and it was approved. The bad taste is now in my mouth, and I am being nice to the commisioner of the league and took back my angry words of give me my money back RIGHT NOW!

Is this the right forum to discuss something like this?

Would love to see other owner's impression of a deal that seems to stink. Not saying it is collusion, just all of the facts make it look a little "fishy"

J

[SmedIndy]

If a deal stinks - make your voice heard - and if it isn't - get out.

Life's too short to worry about roto league cheaters. If they won't fix it - move on.

[VNV Nation]

One of the problems with legislating against such deals is that you cannot state with any degree of certainty what is and what isn't going to turn out to be a good deal.

I think we've all seen roto trades that look one-sided but end up going the other way.

[poorme]

This is one of the reasons I don't play fantasy games. Who needs the aggravation?

[soxfan121]

Without the specifics of the deal, it is hard to make a determination of collusion. And like VNV said, I've seen deals I thought were terribly one-sided end up that way: going the other way from where I thought.

Quick story: I play in a keeper league with friends from college. In April, in the first week of the season, I actually protested a deal in this league. The deal was Tony Batsita for Edgar Martinez. I thought them team giving up Edgar was getting the screws...little did I know.

OK, not fair to post a msg. and not get into specifics, but I was unsure if the thread was valid.

13 team mixed keeper league $260 ($5 added to current year price for a keeper.)

Initial details:

1. 3 friends were added to the league this year
2. Concerns about possible collusion were in peoples minds, but I argued that we have a commish to keep things fair (I was not one of the 3.)
3. Two of these 3 teams were involved in the deal, one out of contention, one in contention for money.
4. This could have been a trade for "next year" for team #2 but offers were made to team #1 offering more for less in return.
5. Team #2 gave up virtually all players on his team with value in this one trade.
6. Both teams are experience roto players, so nobody can argue ignorance

Sit down when you read this, because you are going to cry!

The initial approved deal that was eventually once a few owners DEMANDED their money back:

Team #1 (team out of contention, "building for next year, or getting extra cash this year")
1. Sammy Sosa - CHC/ OF--$39
2. Manny Ramirez - BOS/OF--$26
3. Tomo Ohka - MON/P--$0 (mid-year p/u, not a keeper)
4. Roberto Alomar - NYM/2B--$31
5. Mike Mussina - NYY/P --$31


Team #2 (Team in contention)
1. Mike Williams - PIT/P--$5
2. Brent Abernathy - TB/2B--$1
3. Mark Prior - CHC/P--$1
4. Cliff Floyd - FLA/OF--$7
5. David Ortiz - MIN/DH--$1

REMEMBER TO ADD $5 TO THESE VALUES

Ok, so in essence, the trade was (since all the rest are unimportant and are not keepers at those values):

Sosa, Ramirez, Alomar, and Mussina
for
Prior and Floyd (maybe, I repeat, maybe, Williams)

4 superstars for 1 and 1/2 stars (Floyd is nice, and Prior should be great at $1, but who knows, he looks better each start)

WHAT MAKES THE DEAL LOOK FISHY:

1. These guys are buds, but I know I want to kick all of my buds butts when I play them, I personnaly don't consider this a valid argument.
2. Teams have offered up more to Team #1, i.e Soriano $7 and Ishii $5 for Sosa, Alomar, Mussina.
3. Prior was always removed from trades when he easily should have been included, and it was predicted that he would go to one of the "3 teams" in a blockbuster deal for
"next year" to one of the "3 teams"
4. After the trade, team #2 said (after this trade was completed on a Sunday night) that he wanted to get it done ASAP because MLB was going to strike at anytime. C'mon I know this guy is knowledgeable to know strikes are scheduled in advance and he also said he did not want to get stuck with expensive players for next year if they did strike.
5. Argument #4 was made without knowing what our league rules were for payouts or keepers were if MLB does strike. This same player seems to know ALL of our other league rules...hmm...

OK, enough rambling. The trade stunk...Nothing else to say about it.

Lastly, the commish did finally approve this trade, though again, Team #1 was told to shop around and DID NOT!!!

Team #1 (team out of contention, "building for next year, or getting extra cash this year")
1. Sammy Sosa - CHC/ OF--$39
2. Manny Ramirez - BOS/OF--$26
3. Tomo Ohka - MON/P--$0 (mid-year p/u, not a keeper)
4. Roberto Alomar - NYM/2B--$31


Team #2 (Team in contention)
1. Mike Williams - PIT/P--$5
2. Brent Abernathy - TB/2B--$1
3. Mark Prior - CHC/P--$1
4. Cliff Floyd - FLA/OF--$7

Basically just removed Moose and Ortiz. Now one less supstar and one less "scrub" in the deal. A little better yes, but teams were offering up more and Team #1 would still not bite.

Opinions on this deal, with most of the info laid out???

J

[VNV Nation]

Alex Patton used to say that hearing about other people's roto leagues is like listening to someone talk about their dreams. It's something you really can't get into unless you were there.

I would not have had any problem at all with the first deal. If you accept the premise of continuous leagues and keepers, there will always be deals where a contender gets way more talent than he gives up. A $7 Floyd and a $1 Prior is going to help the other guy a lot more in the future. Whether or not they are buds is basically irrelevent.

[SmedIndy]

I wouldn't have that big of a problem with it, but it was rather early to dump salary. If they don't want to come back next year, there's your problem. But on the whole it isn't that bad of a dump-type trade.