Dirty Play or Good Strategy

[The_Idiot]

I might have been unethical. What do you think.

12 team league, I have 11th waiver spot. Pretty competive league. I post a message to all owners telling them that if they were lucky enough to claim Matt Garza that I would be interested in trading for him.

By doing this I essentially blocked some of the other oweners chasing me (I am in 1st place) from getting Garza. The owners towards the bottom of the standings have higher waiver priority.

[teddy ballgame]

Don't see anything wrong with that. Nice move.

[mikegp]

Don't see anything wrong with it either.

[Starkmadfan]

I suppose it would only be unethical if you had no intention at all of trading for Garza and some GM gave up their WW position solely on the expectation of being able to trade him to you. However, you didn't make this deal at all with any one GM specifically - and you said you would be "interested" - not that you were offering x player for him.

Can't really say thumbs down - if anything, a GM who saw your post should contact you first before making the waiver claim on Garza to work out a tentative deal with you once the claim is successful - and then if you bail out on him after he does it - then If they go ahead without talking to you first and then find that your "interest" is only mild, they've assumed the risk I think.

[jake_harv88]

no way not unethical. Nice move . I see no difference between what you did and say trying to talk up a crappy player before draft day...

[j_d_mcnugent]

I suppose it would only be unethical if you had no intention at all of trading for Garza and some GM gave up their WW position solely on the expectation of being able to trade him to you. However, you didn't make this deal at all with any one GM specifically - and you said you would be "interested" - not that you were offering x player for him.

Can't really say thumbs down - if anything, a GM who saw your post should contact you first before making the waiver claim on Garza to work out a tentative deal with you once the claim is successful - and then if you bail out on him after he does it - then If they go ahead without talking to you first and then find that your "interest" is only mild, they've assumed the risk I think.

that how i feel about it.

[rentz]

nothing wrong with it at all. and as said above, interested owners should be contacting you before they make the waiver claim.

[vykeengfan]

I might have been unethical. What do you think.

12 team league, I have 11th waiver spot. Pretty competive league. I post a message to all owners telling them that if they were lucky enough to claim Matt Garza that I would be interested in trading for him.

By doing this I essentially blocked some of the other oweners chasing me (I am in 1st place) from getting Garza. The owners towards the bottom of the standings have higher waiver priority.

I did the same thing w/ Hamels. I talked to the people who had a higher waiver priority than I did, reached an agreement on a trade, and when one of them got Hamels, we went through w/ the trade.

[Art Vandelay]

I worked a deal like this with another manager in my league last year. He had the last waiver priority, I was third or fourth, and he really wanted Willy Mo Pena. He must have found out that someone else had a claim on him, so he told me if I claimed him he'd trade for him. We ended working out a deal that sent me Webb for Willy Mo. Needless to say, that worked out pretty good for me.

[The_Idiot]

Thanks everybody. Two other owners are still whining claiming I am ruining the league since I have a 20 point lead (5x5 Roto) and Garza's claim will not impact me. I tend to disagree that my lead is that safe.

I guess maybe the only thing I should have done different is gone directly to the #1 or #2 waiver guys and told them individually instead of posting to the whole league.