Fantasy Baseball Cafe Forums

by **smoovethug** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 am

This debate came up in my $ league with friends earlier this year. I was looking to add Cueto but I had the 9th waiver and was sure I wouldn't get him. The owner with the #1 priority isn't as savvy and didn't know much about Cueto. So I had an idea to offer a tentative trade with him. The deal was that he would claim Cueto and in return I would trade him "x". I mentioned my plans to the commissioner who is also my good friend and he was upset and said that if I did something like that he would veto the trade because it's collusion. Should a situation like this be fair game or no?

by **Yoda** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:34 am

We allow trading waiver priority in our league. What is wrong with that?

by **red_sox_fan** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:35 am

As long as "x" was a player then it isn't collusion since you are just trading someone for Cueto. The risky part in doing this is that you have now alerted the other team that Cueto is someone that has value.

by **stevethumb** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:36 am

i suppose it is no different than asking for another team to trade for a certain player from a 3rd team then have him trade that player to you

by **deerayfan072** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:39 am

No this isn't collusion at all. You are doing a trade for a priority, which turned into a guy

by **smoovethug** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:41 am

Yoda wrote:We allow trading waiver priority in our league. What is wrong with that?

Ask Snakes Gould. O:-)

by **deerayfan072** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:52 am

smoovethug wrote:
Yoda wrote:We allow trading waiver priority in our league. What is wrong with that?

Ask Snakes Gould.

Tell Snakes to quite being a retard :-D

by **flloyd** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:54 am

I am very anti-veto but I can see where the Commish is coming from. It seems a little fishy since you were influencing the other owner to make moves that you suspect he would not have done otherwise, in the process you harmed other teams that would have used their higher waiver priority on him. That being said, you must have had to offer him some value in return so it made his team better, which is generally the opposite result of collusion. I imagine that even if he didn't know about Cueto, after hearing how interested you were in him and maybe doing some research he should have been savvy enough to get some pretty decent value in return, right? If however he pretty much gave him away for free I think this situation seems a little fishy and should maybe have gone up to a league vote. Also maybe the league should consider changing it's rules or trying to replace the owner if they feel he is too ignorant for his own good / the competitive balance of the league.

by **AussieDodger** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:54 am

deerayfan072 wrote:
smoovethug wrote:
Yoda wrote:We allow trading waiver priority in our league. What is wrong with that?

Ask Snakes Gould.

Tell Snakes to quite being a retard

I think his helmet is cutting off the circulation to his brain in this case. :-D