Ethics issue - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Ethics issue

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby jnormy » Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:12 pm

CBMGreatOne wrote:
Deals like this are BAD for fantasy leagues. I personally never want to be a part of one of them.


I've heard this before, and personally I just don't get the philosophy. All fantasy leagues have winners and losers, bad teams and good teams, and a handful in the middle of the pack. Rarely do you see a league where every single team is right around .500.

So how do leagues get that way? Through good and bad decisions... whether it be via drafting, add/drops, or trades. If EVERY person in the league is a complete moron, yeah it wouldn't be any fun. But it's kind of "pie in the sky" to think that every single player is always going to do the smart thing. Maybe they're desperate to fill a particular position. Maybe they think there's untapped potential for certain players. Or maybe they just hate the guy they're trading. That's life, and that's sports.

There are smart and dumb owners, managers, and coaches in pro sports too. Why should fantasy be so different? The other guy offered it. The commish didn't veto it. Don't be guilty. Be happy, and move on. Just don't complain when the next team comes along and fleeces him! :-b
jnormy
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1298
(Past Year: 5)
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby CBMGreatOne » Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:17 pm

Wait... I just reread the initial post, and it seems the commish basically promised that he wouldn't veto anything.

To me, this is unintelligent policy. The veto system shouldn't be eliminated in all but the most competitive of leagues (which, this is not if it has a manager capable of making that trade with you). Your above post seems to indicate that the commish has control of the vetos but has promised never to excercise that control. This is an inherently counterintuitive way to run a league if you want to know my opinion.

Somehow, I don't believe that the commish explicitly said that he wouldn't veto ANY trades, but still set trade review on commissioner as opposed to league votes. At that point why not just turn trade review off entirely?

If no one else in your league makes a huge stink, that's one thing, but if I had made that trade I would have a real time crusading on behalf of its merits.
CBMGreatOne
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3166
(Past Year: 89)
Joined: 30 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby CBMGreatOne » Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:21 pm

I've heard this before, and personally I just don't get the philosophy. All fantasy leagues have winners and losers, bad teams and good teams, and a handful in the middle of the pack. Rarely do you see a league where every single team is right around .500.


Yes, but if you're playing in a league where deals like this are going down and you've been in the fantasy game for more than one year, I think you seriously owe it to yourself to find a more serious league.

Bad trades compromise the legitimacy of the game. This is the case in both real and fantasy sports. I understand that my point of view is not a popular one around these parts (we've had this particular discussion ad nauseum), but if I made a trade like that, I'd pretty much feel guilty for the rest of the season.

It's fun to go to your team page and look at a fantasy all-star team, but to me it's a lot more fulfilling to win the league by preparing well for the draft, monitoring all the players closely during the course of the season, making the right add/drops, and reorganizing/upgrading the value throughout your roster with FAIR trades.

I don't think any of the above people who have commented on this thread so far would touch Gomes/Escobar for Beltran with a ten foot pole, and I'd bet a lot of them would vote to veto such a deal if it were pending in their leagues.

The people on this message board are going to be the smartest people in their respective leagues, thus they often make trades in which they are the clear winner and rarely make trades in which they are the clear loser. When their trades get vetoed they get upset, and thus they have a special hate for the veto function.

I don't hate the veto function. I would never play in a league without it unless I KNEW and TRUSTED EVERY person playing.

I want to win with skill, not because I propose five lopsided trades a day until someone gives me Soriano for Francouer.

I'll get off my soap box now. Whether you like my opinion or not, it's a selfless one. I'm not so sure you can say the same for many others.
CBMGreatOne
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3166
(Past Year: 89)
Joined: 30 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Secret Avatar » Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:47 pm

Come on people, if you get OFFERED a trade that you think is bad for the other team, are you really gonna turn it down? Come on now, no one is gonna do that.

On the actual deal itself -- Beltran for Gomes and Escobar -- I agree its lousy for the guy giving up Beltran, but I've seen worse.

Recall that a few months ago Beltran was considered a huge bust and was getting sold for junk in many leagues. Now he has a few hot months and he's all that again. Beltran's owner could rationally have been trying to sell him before he came back to Earth, although I agree he could have gotten more for him that he did.
I am the Master. Don't question the Master. Just do what he says and be proud.
Secret Avatar
General Manager
General Manager

Cafeholic
Posts: 3235
Joined: 15 Nov 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby CBMGreatOne » Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:32 pm

Come on people, if you get OFFERED a trade that you think is bad for the other team, are you really gonna turn it down? Come on now, no one is gonna do that.


Yes, I did refuse a similar deal, see above. I was commissioner of the league and although we have vetoes set to league votes, I decided rather than let it be incumbent upon my leaguemates to shoot it down (believe me, they would have in a HEARTBEAT) that I would just reject it myself and save them the trouble, and myself the ridicule.

This is the kind of league I play in, absolutely no nonsense.

The trade above is nonsense. Do people really want to play in leagues that allow such things? I sure don't.
CBMGreatOne
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3166
(Past Year: 89)
Joined: 30 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Gepfar » Tue Jun 27, 2006 7:54 am

CBM, I understand your position and respect it. But my philosophy in fantasy sports is somewhat different. The whole idea of fantasy sports is that you get to play owner/manager. You get to be the one making decisions for you team - good and bad. Any 3rd party decision making body takes that aspect of the game away. When you make bad decisions, you live with the consequences. The only reason I would keep a 3rd party decision maker around would be to guard against collusion, and collusion is the only valid reason (in my mind) for not allowing a trade.

As someone said earlier, I would rather see league members put a little pressure on a manager who makes poor decisions...help them see the error of their ways. One of three things will happen: 1) They will learn from their past mistakes and become better managers in order to be competitive; 2) They will decide that fantasy sports is not their cup of tea and leave the league; or 3) They blindly continue to make poor decisions and simply donate their money to the prize pool each year.
Gep
Gepfar
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 563
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby jsphlly » Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:36 am

I'm pretty much with Gepfar.

Been commish since 2000 and it’s basically been the same group of core guys. We didn't get real serious about it until 2004 when we started playing for money. Don't get me wrong, fun and bragging rights are still very important; let me get to my point.
Until this year, I always used the option for 'League Votes' on Yahoo. With this option, managers could anonymously vote against trades and it only took 4 votes against. It got so bad last year, that no trades could be made. Managers were voting against trades simply because they could, or "so-and-so voted against my trade", etc.

An active manager who typically finishes near the top had developed, due to injuries out of his control, a rep for making out like a bandit on trades. Anything he had cooking was immediately shot down because of this.

So this year, I changed trade review to "Commissioner". At our draft, I made it clear that collusion should be the only reason to veto a trade. We're playing for money, and just like major league teams, there is a human manager accepting or declining every trade proposed to them. Did any MLB teams try to veto the Liriano-Nathan-Bonser for Pierzynski trade?

I also made it very clear, because we do have some rookie managers, that if someone felt a trade was very unfair, to post a message saying so and the trade would be put up to a vote. The big difference I've noticed is that because you can no longer anonymously vote against a trade, people are much more hesitant to try and veto.

We haven't had any problems yet this season. Typically when a trade has been made, a few managers will post their thoughts about who's getting the better end of the deal, but no one is arguing, no one is fighting, and everyone is managing their teams they way they want.
jsphlly
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 882
Joined: 28 Feb 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby CBMGreatOne » Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:29 pm

I think that's a great system. I like the idea of setting the veto to commish control and having people be accountable for their public votes. This whole topic is kind of irrelevant to my leagues though. I have been playing fantasy baseball seriously for a while now, I have a core group of guys, and nobody is a newbie anymore.

As such, I never have to worry about such a trade as was described in this thread being made. It just wouldn't EVER happen- and if it did, it would be vetoed as soon as four managers viewed their team page. That's the kind of league I want to play in- a no-nonsense one. Nobody's going to tell me at the end of the year that I won the league largely because I was able to fleece another manager. They'll say I did it because I traded Brandon Webb and Garret Atkins for David Wright or because I made the right add/drops all year. I don't want any potential asterisks on my winning season and, like it or not, there will be people with hard feelings when you win a league largely due to a trade like this one.

Again, if you accept a deal that someone else proposed, you are technically free of guilt, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to feel that you gypped all of the other people in the league along with the newbie owner that you got the bad deal from.
CBMGreatOne
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3166
(Past Year: 89)
Joined: 30 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby rainman23 » Tue Jun 27, 2006 3:48 pm

CBMGreatOne wrote:I think that's a great system. I like the idea of setting the veto to commish control and having people be accountable for their public votes. This whole topic is kind of irrelevant to my leagues though. I have been playing fantasy baseball seriously for a while now, I have a core group of guys, and nobody is a newbie anymore.

As such, I never have to worry about such a trade as was described in this thread being made. It just wouldn't EVER happen- and if it did, it would be vetoed as soon as four managers viewed their team page. That's the kind of league I want to play in- a no-nonsense one. Nobody's going to tell me at the end of the year that I won the league largely because I was able to fleece another manager. They'll say I did it because I traded Brandon Webb and Garret Atkins for David Wright or because I made the right add/drops all year. I don't want any potential asterisks on my winning season and, like it or not, there will be people with hard feelings when you win a league largely due to a trade like this one.

Again, if you accept a deal that someone else proposed, you are technically free of guilt, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to feel that you gypped all of the other people in the league along with the newbie owner that you got the bad deal from.


Great points, CBM. That "asterisk" is a big deal with me. You don't want anybody saying you didn't deserve it, and you sure don't want to feel like you didn't deserve it. We all invest a lot of time in the leagues we're in, and at the end of the day we want that time to be well-spent. It just becomes pointless if you win, or anyone else wins, because they hit the lottery in their dealings with some newbie. Or some manager who just didn't give a shit.
rainman23
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 937
Joined: 19 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby jnormy » Tue Jun 27, 2006 4:24 pm

rainman23 wrote:It just becomes pointless if you win, or anyone else wins, because they hit the lottery in their dealings with some newbie. Or some manager who just didn't give a shit.


Sounds like the Miami Heat... two years ago they hit the lottery by fleecing the Lakers, giving them a bunch of underachieving middle-of-the-road players for perhaps this generation's most dominant big man -- a deal that I'll bet the rest of the teams in the NBA wish THEY had pulled off. (And please don't tell me it wasn't a bad trade; all we've been hearing about for the last two years is how Kobe had no support around him, while Miami goes on the win a title.)

Now the Heat are crowned NBA champions. Funny, I didn't see any asterisks in any of the writeups after the Mavs series, nor did I note any signs of guilt during the team's celebrations. And I doubt any Heat fans would consider the endeavor "pointless." :-?

P.S. Read the top... no spittin', no swearin'... }:-)
jnormy
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1298
(Past Year: 5)
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Saturday, Oct. 25
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Kansas City at San Francisco
(8:07 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact