# Yahoo fantasy football signup now open... **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [July 5, 2005, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152 "2005-07-05T17:02:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/221 "2006-03-01T14:22:59Z")
I honestly don’t see a problem with trading future draft picks, but I would only do it for the upcoming year, and only because it’s a pain in the ass to control. In one of my money leagues, the only way you can trade for a future draft pick is if the person who is trading the draft pick pays, up front, next year’s entrance fee. That way, the person isn’t trading a draft pick and then leaving the league, screwing either the guy who inherits his team or the guy who traded for the draft picks. I’m not sure how we could do it for a non-money league. Now I have to get back to finding next years’ super sleeper that will help me kick all your asses next year. It may be a long search… ---
**Author:** ![BabaBooey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/dfb087/32.png) [@BabaBooey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BabaBooey)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/222 "2006-03-01T16:58:11Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Now I have to get back to finding next years’ super sleeper that will help me kick all your asses next year. It may be a long search… I think Ladainian Tomlinson is poised for a pretty good year. You may or may not be able to pick him up in the middle of the 6th round or so, but you may want to use your 5th rounder in case others are privy to him. ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/223 "2006-03-01T18:21:26Z")
> [@Omniscient](#): > > I see your point, but somehow it feels like there’s extra complexity there. Maybe I’m just being paranoid. No, we pretty much all do hate you. ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/224 "2006-03-01T18:33:34Z")
Which makes beating you all the sweeter. Now excuse me while I channel the chip on my shoulder into devising the perfect draft startegy, honing my squad into the unbeatable dynasty. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Mad\_Hermit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b5ac83/32.png) [@The\_Mad\_Hermit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Mad_Hermit)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/225 "2006-03-01T19:26:56Z")
I see that we have a choice- if we declare our keepers now, then we’re obligated to deal only with those three. On the other hand, while we still have all the players on the roster, we can trade a specific pick before declaring the keepers. If the pick is required to be one of the keepers, that works out- but what if the first player has three picks already in mind, and someone wants them to trade a particular player that’s not one of the three? I still intend to play, but I’d like to pass the commissioner’s job to someone who is more into it. I can’t see refereeing some of the squabbles that are bound to come up, and I passed up chances to do things just because someone might accuse me of using the commissioner’s power to gain an advantage. Whether or not it actually happened is another story; I’m just avoiding unnecessary conflict. If we are trading picks, particularly keepers, who will offer me something for Randle El? ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/226 "2006-03-01T19:58:00Z")
You bring up a good point. Since we have been declaring keepers at the end of the off-season, and not the start, trading a keeper becomes a bit more dicey. Ending up with a Ricky Williams situation could get ugly. Maybe it’s time to nominate a new standing commish so we can define these things. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2006, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/227 "2006-03-02T00:44:00Z")
**VarlosZ** did an excellent job as commish for a different league that some of us participated in last year, complete with a nice waivers system. So I’d nominate him. If he’s not into it, and nobody else wants to, I’d be willing to give it a shot. One advantage is that at least I’ll have the fewest potential player conflicts with the rest of you, and thus most rulings would likely have no implications for me or my team. (Just to point out, the only conflict that came up last season for me, Cedrick Houston, was one where I always knew that BabaBooey got him fair and square; my only recourse was an attempt at a public shaming. heh.) Of note is that I’m not exactly eager to be commish, so I’d be willing to do it this coming year and then step down. (The original “rotating commish” idea is starting to come into focus.) Also, I’d agree that it probably makes sense to hold off on trades until we get closer to next year, but I personally have no problem with people doing trades now. (Though I’d add a clause saying that early trades be null & void should the player hit the equivalent of IR before the live draft, ala Kellen Winslow Jr or Ricky Williams.) Regarding trading keeper picks, does anybody else have an opinion on how that impacts the max three keepers rule? Recapping my thoughts: > [@](#): > > Regarding the “max three keepers” rule, I’m going back and forth on this one. You are trading away what I’ll refer to as the “keeper rights” to a player, meaning you can’t make the trade unless you “spend” one of your max three keepers on him. Then again, he is acquiring the “keeper rights” to a player, which could mean he’s using up one of his max three keepers as well. > > I don’t care, and won’t object to whatever, but my two cents would be that this trade – because it involves a keeper – would cost _both_ of you one of your max three keeper spots, meaning that you can only (in effect) keep two guys, and Boom can only keep two guys other than Johnson. So if we put it to a vote, trading a keeper should… a) …cost only the guy trading him away one of his keeper spots. b) …cost only the guy acquiring him one of his keeper spots. c) …cost both owners one keeper spot each. I half-heartedly vote “c”, but could easily be swayed to either of the other two options. If forced to choose between the first two, I’d lean toward “b”, which would have the nice effect of everybody still ending up with a potential 3 keepers. (The first option would result in one owner potentially keeping 4 while the other could only keep 2.) Actually, I just convincend myself. “b” makes the most sense; for the trade currently on the table, it translates into Munch sending one of his keeper slots over to Dave to use on LJ. Finally, I’m not a fan of trading future picks for several reasons, but this post is already too long to enumerate them. ---
**Author:** ![MysteryFellow63427](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e4f/32.png) [@MysteryFellow63427](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MysteryFellow63427)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2006, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/228 "2006-03-02T01:14:10Z")
> [@Ellis Dee](#): > > trading a keeper should… > > a) …cost only the guy trading him away one of his keeper spots. > b) …cost only the guy acquiring him one of his keeper spots. > c) …cost both owners one keeper spot each. I think the rights to “keep” a player should stay vested with the team that player is on at the end of a season, so I like option A. If we use option B (only the acquiring player uses a spot), then we have essentially allowed Team 1 to keep four players (and trade one of them away for another pick.) I believe the goal of the 3-max keepers rule is to ensure that one team doesn’t overly dominate the league. Option A seems to be in the spirit of this goal. For example, if one team had an unbelievable draft and had 5 excellent keepers for the next year, option B (only the acquiring player pays keeper costs) would allow this player to trade 2 of his keepers for high round draft picks, and then use his 3 keeper slots on his remaining 3 good keepers. I’m not saying we shouldn’t reward drafting prowess, but the goal of the 3 keeper rule is to keep things reasonably competetive from year to year. Option B would frustrate this goal. One might argue that the team on the acquring end of the keeper trade is then getting 4 keepers, but I don’t see that as a real problem. Any draft pick traded for a keeper is necessarily going to be higher than the keeper’s spot in the draft, so the acquiring team presumably gains no special advantage by making the deal. I can see even more problematic wrinkles from trading future draft picks, so I think I’m going to adopt a firmer stand and join **Ellis Dee** in the camp of “no trading future picks.” ---
**Author:** ![MysteryFellow63427](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e4f/32.png) [@MysteryFellow63427](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MysteryFellow63427)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2006, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/229 "2006-03-02T01:15:43Z")
\*firmer _stance_ ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2006, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/230 "2006-03-02T03:28:28Z")
> [@neuroman](#): > > I think the rights to “keep” a player should stay vested with the team that player is on at the end of a season, so I like option A. If we use option B (only the acquiring player uses a spot), then we have essentially allowed Team 1 to keep four players (and trade one of them away for another pick.) > > I believe the goal of the 3-max keepers rule is to ensure that one team doesn’t overly dominate the league. Option A seems to be in the spirit of this goal. For example, if one team had an unbelievable draft and had 5 excellent keepers for the next year, option B (only the acquiring player pays keeper costs) would allow this player to trade 2 of his keepers for high round draft picks, and then use his 3 keeper slots on his remaining 3 good keepers. I’m not saying we shouldn’t reward drafting prowess, but the goal of the 3 keeper rule is to keep things reasonably competetive from year to year. Option B would frustrate this goal. I agree totally. > [@](#): > > One might argue that the team on the acquring end of the keeper trade is then getting 4 keepers, but I don’t see that as a real problem. Any draft pick traded for a keeper is necessarily going to be higher than the keeper’s spot in the draft, so the acquiring team presumably gains no special advantage by making the deal. I’m in the camp that says the acquiring team is getting an extra keeper. To me it doesn’t matter that they are giving up a high draft pick. The uncertainty in draft picks makes the inherently less valuable than a keeper. For that reason I’d vote for option C. > [@](#): > > I can see even more problematic wrinkles from trading future draft picks, so I think I’m going to adopt a firmer stand and join Ellis Dee in the camp of “no trading future picks.” Me too, but I’d extend this a little further. Essentially instituting a trading deadline for off season trades. I feel we should not be allowed to trade upcoming draft picks during the season for obvious reasons. Additionally, I think keeper/draft pick trades should only be made after keeper declarations have been made official. No future draft picks can be traded. The keeper declaration deadline should be set sometime between the NFL Draft and our Fantasy Draft, maybe even set at the start of Trainging Camp so we get a idea of what rosters everyone’s likely to be on. This would lessen the chances of a keeper player getting hurt or suspended in the offseason, throwing a trade into smithereens. It makes the risk for everyone equal. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2006, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/231 "2006-03-02T04:45:39Z")
Compelling argument, **neuroman**. While I kinda like the option “c” of it costing both owners a keeper, it just occured to me that logistically speaking, **neuroman** ’s vote for option a is the only viable one. Otherwise, the keeper “penalties” can be easily sidestepped by just making a deal in private and then not making the trade until _after_ the draft. Not to beat on Munch & Dave, but just as an easy to follow example: Assuming option c, they could decide to abandon the #1 for LJ trade altogether and draft normally, having their 3 keepers each. Now, the day after the live draft, Munch can simply trade LT (who would now be a real player instead of a draft pick) for LJ (who is still a keeper but no longer attached to a draft pick) and end up with the same result as option a would have given them. So I strongly favor option a, where it mimics exactly what would happen if they just waited until after the draft. This way there is no incentive for behind the scenes collusion, which would help keep the league as light and friendly as I trust we all want. Also, good points on trading during the season for next year’s picks, **Omni**. I completely agree. As for when the keeper declaration deadline should be, I suggest the day after the final week 3 preseason game is played. (Assuming we can find a draft time later than that but still before opening day.) Week 3 in preseason is really the last time injuries, trades or roster changes take place before the season starts. ---
**Author:** ![Spiritus\_Mundi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c68b51/32.png) [@Spiritus\_Mundi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiritus_Mundi)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2006, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/232 "2006-03-15T14:52:17Z")
My votes: [ol][li]Draft picks may only be traded on draft day with both players present.[/li][li]Keeper picks are treated just like any other draft pick for (1)[/li][li]Keeper picks must be declared one week prior to the live draft[/li][li]Therefore, a keeper pick that gets traded away counted as a keeper only for the original team.[/li][li]As a consequence of (1), future draft picks may never be traded.[/li][/ol] Oh, and I think if Ellis is willing to take on the role of commish he has already demonstrated the OCD tendencies that the job requires. He gets my vote. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2006, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/233 "2006-03-15T15:45:37Z")
> [@Spiritus Mundi](#): > > As a consequence of (1), future draft picks may never be traded. The nuance – that I never realized until I corresponded with **Munch** – is that trading a keeper _is_ trading future draft picks. (Assuming they aren’t in their last year of eligibility, as LJ is and which **Munch** was unaware of.) Consider **The Mad Hermit** and Willie Parker. He’s probably late first round value for the next two seasons, and he can be kept in the 8th and 6th rounds respectively. Let’s ignore for the moment that he’s a homer pick. What possible incentive would Hermit have for trading him away if we can’t offer him a compensatory pick in the second year to offset the fact that he’s losing late first round value from a 6th round pick? ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2006, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/234 "2006-03-15T22:31:13Z")
> [@Ellis Dee](#): > > Consider **The Mad Hermit** and Willie Parker. He’s probably late first round value for the next two seasons, and he can be kept in the 8th and 6th rounds respectively. Let’s ignore for the moment that he’s a homer pick. What possible incentive would Hermit have for trading him away if we can’t offer him a compensatory pick in the second year to offset the fact that he’s losing late first round value from a 6th round pick? I realize that as a problem, but it’s one I’m willing to stomach compared to the problems created by future draft pick trading. Personally I like th thought of keepers actually being keepers…meaning they belong to the player who drafted them. I’m in the minority I assume so I’m open to deciding a system to trade them, but we need to accept that were aren’t recreating the NFL here and everything isn’t necessarily a comodity. Keeping things manageable is important here, especially since this is entirely done via email and message boards. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Mad\_Hermit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b5ac83/32.png) [@The\_Mad\_Hermit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Mad_Hermit)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2006, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/235 "2006-03-15T23:16:00Z")
I will come down on the side of not trading draft picks. The situation that I’m in is a valid argument- how could I get a fair value for a player if he’s a relatively cheap draft pick for the round he’s taken? Multi-year trades present a whole new problem- if the player’s performance falls off, and he is devalues, the owner who accepted the trade is stuck with an undesirable man, potentially ruining his team. I say that we keep each year as a self-contained entity, and if trading of top picks is desired, then do it after the draft. We have no website that keeps the rosters in a format independent of our Yahoo host, and it will take a lot of work to add to whay can already be done. If you want a custom league with all the trimmings, there are pay leagues out there that make it all worth the time you spend. This one is more of a “casual” league, and why complicate it more than it already is? One other little thing: Everyone came back from the previous year, and I hope everyone comes back again- but if someone drops out, we need to know in time before the draft so that we can allow some other Doper to join us- there are plenty out there. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2006, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/236 "2006-03-16T05:06:33Z")
Probably the best balance is to stick with **Mundi** ’s five point plan. It’s the easiest way to allow the fun of trading picks without adding any real complication to the league. The point I brought up regarding keeper trades: Both sides in such a trade should just factor in the reality that they cannot offer “future incentive” to offset the loss of the keeper in future years, and adjust the trade offer accordingly. ---
**Author:** ![MysteryFellow63427](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e4f/32.png) [@MysteryFellow63427](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MysteryFellow63427)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2006, 10:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/237 "2006-03-16T10:14:12Z")
> [@Ellis Dee](#): > > Consider **The Mad Hermit** and Willie Parker. He’s probably late first round value for the next two seasons, and he can be kept in the 8th and 6th rounds respectively. Let’s ignore for the moment that he’s a homer pick. What possible incentive would Hermit have for trading him away if we can’t offer him a compensatory pick in the second year to offset the fact that he’s losing late first round value from a 6th round pick? Well, couldn’t **The Mad Hermit** agree to trade Willie Parker and his 15th pick for someone else’s #1 and #2 pick? I don’t think you need multi year deals to achieve “fair” compensation for a stud keeper in a trade. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/238 "2006-03-17T12:13:51Z")
> [@neuroman](#): > > Well, couldn’t **The Mad Hermit** agree to trade Willie Parker and his 15th pick for someone else’s #1 and #2 pick? I don’t think you need multi year deals to achieve “fair” compensation for a stud keeper in a trade. Exactly. ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/239 "2006-03-17T15:11:58Z")
WRT the LJ trade, neither Munch nor I realized that he only had this coming year of keeper status left. Trading next year’s 2nd round pick was to compensate me for giving up LJ in that year too (cuz I likely would have kept him again). Since he only has 1 year of keeper eligibility left, this is obviously a moot point, and I have indicated to Munch that I am willing to modify the trade (although I haven’t heard back from him yet). That being said, I don’t really see a problem with trading future draft picks for multi year keepers. All the arguments against it make little sense to me. It IS how the real NFL works, and we’re modeled on that. This is a fun league, not a money league, so big deal anyway. We’re been going 3 years now with the same teams, saying “Oh, someone might quit” is certainly true, but it shouldn’t be hard to find a replacement if they do. “Someone might quit” is in fact a better argument against keepers entirely. As for the keeper trade question, definitely “B”. Use my situation as an example. If trading LJ can’t get me extra picks and is going to cost me a keeper spot, _why on earth would I have any incentive at all to make a trade?_. I can’t think of one, can someone give me one? Trades are exciting because they have that element of risk on each side, and the calculations each owner makes as to the benefits to him or her. Each owner is going to calculate this risk differently. That’s what makes it exciting. Arguing that “we have to make sure every trade is absolutely “fair”” defeats the purpose of trades entirely. If I want to trade LJ for Matt Schobel, well then, that’s my business, isn’t it? Nobody makes a trade unless they think they are going to benefit more than the other guy from it. Someone is usually wrong in their calculations. That’s the whole fun of it. ---
**Author:** ![MysteryFellow63427](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e4f/32.png) [@MysteryFellow63427](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MysteryFellow63427)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2006, 6:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152/240 "2006-03-23T06:53:51Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > If trading LJ can’t get me extra picks and is going to cost me a keeper spot, _why on earth would I have any incentive at all to make a trade?_. I can’t think of one, can someone give me one? See my above post. You could trade LJ and your #15 for a #1 and #2 pick (or whatever.) Your incentive to trade is having four picks in the first two rounds. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yahoo-fantasy-football-signup-now-open/311152.md?page=13)