Retro’s objection was lukewarm, but the other three are strong objections.
Hard to quantify the no veto positions, but for me, while I don’t “strongly support” the trade, I am pretty strongly against vetoing it. I believe Peteys’ position is also strong.
EDIT: In the interest of compromise, I would be open to a penalty instead of a veto. For example, tossing in Jules’ 2nd rounder next year for Overly’s last pick to help even things out and give a hypothetical new owner a little more to work with. I’m not saying I want to impose this, just that I could be convinced.
ETA: And to be clear, 10 years from now looking back, I can imagine it being that Overly ends up having gotten the better end of this deal. As in it’s possible, so I’m really not eager to penalize anyone draft picks.
Past the edit window, still spitballing, I might be more open to a conditional penalty: If Overly leaves and we need a new manager, then apply the draft pick penalty as above or something else similar. But assuming he stays, no harm no foul, trade is fine as-is.
Alright. In the interest of oiling troubled waters, I’m going to stay. Clearly I’ve caused some consternation here and I will see this through, and hope I won’t take any grief when I make more trades that you guys don’t like.
Once and for the record, I think this trade is perfectly defensible. Watson I’m happy to be rid of for reasons detailed already, and this few days may have been my very last window to move him. Brown is great right now, but he’s ALSO a Sex Criminal, who was facing felony DV charges a year ago on top. That behavior doesn’t just evaporate and his bottom could fall out anytime.
Kittle is great at times, but again, two 1000 yard seasons, never more than 5 TD, and who’s his qb? I figure I have two more Gronk/Brady seasons, I’ll take that. And Mac Jones? The underpowered dad bod? Another system guy from Bama? They’ll be another Mac Jones next year along, and I expect the Pats are only a couple years from the end of Belichick and blowing it up, to boot.
I got Aaron Rodgers, a perennial MVP who also happens to be carrying the biggest chip on his shoulder in the league. I’ll take my chances with the rest.
I haven’t weighed in on the trade, I’d vote to let it go through, both sides have explained their reasons. If this was a big dollar money league, I’d veto it.
No part of fantasy football seems to incite passion as the idea of unfair trades.
I remember I nearly got in a fistfight in my home league the year I “fleeced” someone the week after Jay Ajayi had back-to-back 200 yard games, and was obviously the second coming of OJ Simpson. I don’t remember what I gave, or if I won or lost, but I’m sure glad my friend didn’t punch me over it.
Staying would definitely be cool. I’d like to see you take the time to turn your team around. I was really rooting for Dale who was a doormat for years but really worked at it and turned his team around. I was rooting for him right up until about this year because his team is good enough to win the division and beat me regularly so now I would like him go back to geting worse. I think everyone here roots for the underdogs when they personally aren’t involved.
For what it’s worth, I hope you’re right. I hope that trade works out for you. Maybe Rodgers will bridge a gap long enough for you to get a young star QB for when he retires. Maybe Akers will be the first RB to come back from an achilles tear - he’s got as good a chance as anyone since he’s so young and apparently, his recovery seems to be going pretty well.
I understand that you felt attacked and defensive about the way people reacted to the trade, but just to be clear, it wasn’t an attack on you so much as concern about the potential new owner having enough assets to work with. If you’ll be staying I don’t think anyone would have a problem with the trade, even if they think it’s a bad deal, but we often do.
Just a bit of advice - if I were a team near the bottom of the standings but had a few older but still valuable pieces like Kittle, I’d try to trade for draft picks if I could. Hitting on draft picks is most effective way to long term improvement, although Dale managed to do it primarily through trades for players. You could always float people you’re interested in trading in the thread, maybe you’d get a better offer.
Anyway, I would like you to stay on board with us for years and improve your team, but I don’t want you to be unhappy about being here. No one thinks any less of you because your team is bad - the nature of dynasty is such that it takes a few years to dig yourself out of a hole and most of us have been there at some point in the league’s history. Really, I would imagine that people respect the effort and trying to compete and improve your team more than actual results. Maybe do what you did here - throw out some offers and re-make your team into one that you like more and it’ll help you feel invested in your team and your future.
I think I brought this up years ago, but I saw a rule once for leagues that I thought was interesting: whenever a trade was worked out, the trade would be posted publically in the league forum. All other players had a few days to make better offers if they felt like one side of the trade wasn’t getting enough back. So, say, if someone sold a valuable player for less than their value, instead of grumbling or voting against it, they’d say “hey, you deserve more than that, let me give you this similarly valued player and a second round pick too” or “let me give you this guy I think you’ll like more”
The players in the trade would then have the option of keeping the original trade, or if they got a better offer, cancelling the original trade and taking the new deal. It’s almost like a trade auction.
I thought it’s an interesting idea, creates interest in the league from more players, probably helps prevent lopsided trades, and very well might get more trades done.
Sounds interesting to me. What do you guys think? I’d like to hear the arguments against it, too.
I like this idea, and to be frank, I’m always shocked when people don’t do this on their own. Seems like a pretty obvious negotiating tactic. At the very least I think I’d private message everyone looking for a better offer if I didn’t want to do it publicly.
Once of the bigger challenges with fantasy football in general is that many players simply have more time to dedicate to things. For example, there’s a pretty subtle but important advantage to those people who have the freedom to log on the second that waivers expire and pick up the best unclaimed free agents for nothing. Anyone who sleeps in or has other distractions on Wednesday morning is at a disadvantage. Heck, you’re at a disadvantage simply based on your time zone, on the West Coast it’s barely a late night for you, East Coast it’s the middle of the night. Similarly, if you’re East Coast and no one is up late you’re probably awake first and get dibs.
The above is a really simple example, but obviously this applies to things like monitoring every other roster for injuries and positional weakness and sending out feelers for trades every week. That takes quite a bit of time staring at a screen to find these advantageous trade opportunities. Were I that kind of player (and with a 3 month old, I’m definitely not gonna be any time soon) I’d probably be pretty dis-incentivized to give away that edge by positing trade offers publicly. But making it a standard would certainly level the field and would probably motivate all the other owners in the league to participate in more trades. Right now it’s really the same 4 or 5 owners doing most of the trading, probably just 2 or 3 who actively initiate them. I don’t think it’s an unwillingness on the other owners, but really they just aren’t able to invest the time and energy.
I like this idea. The only downside I can see is that when trades happen on a Friday or Saturday they’re often pushed through for that weekend’s games. Having to open it up to the public essentially makes those types of deals of impossible.
That said, I’m in favor of it unless there are some major objections.
Also, I need to complain about how I picked the wrong time to drop Randall Cobb. Adams, Lazard, and Valdes-Scantling are all unexpectedly out this week (COVID for the first two and Valdes-Scantling is still on IR) and he would have been a great flex.
I’m so glad you were in a trading mood in 2019. I may not be good right now, but I like my odds of being good in the future with Kyler Murray on my team.
It’s a bit of extra logistics but I wouldn’t be opposed to having a relatively short window for this. Like trades should be posted to the thread for 12 hours or something before they can be advanced.
In reality, those last minute trades being pushed through are a courtesy. Standard league settings require a 2 day veto period IIRC and in a passively managed league you’d not have the option for fast tracking trades.
In fact I’d be OK with leveraging that mechanic to manage this. We could say that any trade that gets accepted must be simultaneously posted to the thread. It sits in a “pending review” status while other owners have a day to propose a better offer. The commish could cancel the trade at the request of either party should a better deal arise.
Today I think most owners treat an “accepted” trade as a done deal and it would be considered reneging to later accept a competing deal and cancel the trade, but that’s pretty much just etiquette which we could agree to change.
I’m not a fan of the proposal. I see it providing a disincentive for more trades being processed, not an incentive to encourage trading. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I know I wouldn’t bother taking the time to scour rosters and send out trade proposals if I know I can sit back, do no work, and just overbid on everyone else’s work. It also encourages defensive trading, say by overbidding to prevent anyone in your division from trading to improve, which is a silly and weird concept. I’m not sure that would happen often, but it wouldn’t be possible now and would be with the suggestion in place, so it would objectively be more likely to happen.
Finally, and most importantly, it frankly would not be possible to implement this suggestion with our draft rules, and would make trading of picks during the draft all but impossible. We have trouble hitting our deadlines lately as it is, and elongating the draft to accommodate this review window on every single trade is an unnecessary complication. Again, this does not seem to me to encourage more trading.
The point about not being able to trade on Friday or Saturday is a big deal, I think. It shrinks the window where trades could be accepted in order to be reviewed in time. Shrinking that window, providing an incentive not to send offers, that all seems like it would result in fewer trades to me, not more.