Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion? - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby smoovethug » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:59 am

flloyd wrote: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.


We didn't work out any specifics on the deal but I can assure you that I wasn't aiming to rip the guy off, just trying to find a way to acquire Cueto, something that I couldn't do with my low waiver priority.
Image

Hal·la·day, n. 1. every fifth day in Philadelphia. 2. a day of rest for the bullpen. 3. innings eater. 4. doc. 5. ace.
smoovethug
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertGolden Eagle EyeWeb SupporterLucky Ladders ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 8954
(Past Year: 87)
Joined: 6 Nov 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Halladay Season

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby Matthias » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:03 am

No, it's not collusion, at least no more than is necessary to do a trade in the first place.

I could see something further down this road that starts getting out of bounds... if you're playing someone H2H and you ask them to bench a player in exchange for being favorable in a trade. But that's seeing things that isn't there. A waiver claim is still a player at the end of the day and a player for a player is perfectly fine.

Oh, at flloyd, though, most of the time collusion helps both parties, that's why they do it. It's only a particular type of collusion (I'll offer you Joe Crede plus $20 for M-Cab and keep hush hush) that people think about. But at a very roots level, collusion simply entails collective action by people who are supposed to be behaving competitively.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 4860
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby Snakes Gould » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:28 am

flloyd wrote: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.


thats kind of how i felt about it. trading waiver positions in general is definitely allowed, but to influence an owner that other-wise would not have made any action, seemed fishy to me. (and this is coming from smoove, who once tried to pull off a cross sport trade, houshmanzadeh for a bum FA and then in baseball david ortiz for bum fa.) just have to keep his shady tactics in line :-b

a definition of collusion:

collusion takes place within an industry when rival companies cooperate for their mutual benefit.
Image

SIGS!

Shane Victorino wrote:“We keep fighting,” Victorino said. “We keep plugging along.”
Snakes Gould
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterGolden Eagle EyeWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 16051
(Past Year: 65)
Joined: 1 Nov 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Eternal Bliss

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby smoovethug » Wed Apr 30, 2008 2:47 am

Snakes Gould wrote:
flloyd wrote: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.


and this is coming from smoove, who once tried to pull off a cross sport trade, houshmanzadeh for a bum FA and then in baseball david ortiz for bum fa.) just have to keep his shady tactics in line :-b


A) That cross-sport trade wasn't my idea. B) There was no "bum FA" involved liar, this was back in 04 so I don't recall the exact players but it was a fair trade in both sports where I downgraded in football to upgrade in baseball. C) You were the commissioner then as well and allowed the trade! :-b
Image

Hal·la·day, n. 1. every fifth day in Philadelphia. 2. a day of rest for the bullpen. 3. innings eater. 4. doc. 5. ace.
smoovethug
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertGolden Eagle EyeWeb SupporterLucky Ladders ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 8954
(Past Year: 87)
Joined: 6 Nov 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Halladay Season

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby byfrcp » Wed Apr 30, 2008 4:02 am

Here's my question.

Why didn't you just wait to see who picked up Cueto and then do a trade with that person?

Essentially that's what you were doing, but you were trying to take advantage of someone who didn't have a full understanding of the potential value he was giving up. Either way you should have been offering the same amount of value to "#1 Waiver Ignorant Person" as you would have to "Person Who Really Picked Up Cueto".

While it isn't collusion, it could go under the competitive balance argument, which I don't understand how people can argue against. If someone loved Nomar Garciaparra, he was their favorite player for 10 years, and you knowing that information trade him Nomar for Prince Fielder, that's dissrupting the competitive balance, even though technically not collusion.
byfrcp
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Eagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 2204
(Past Year: 10)
Joined: 19 Jun 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby bigh0rt » Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:15 am

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this.
Image
bigh0rt
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 24647
(Past Year: 821)
Joined: 3 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Crowding The Plate

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby Tavish » Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:27 am

Snakes Gould wrote:a definition of collusion:

collusion takes place within an industry when rival companies cooperate for their mutual benefit.

So you consider every single trade to be collusion because that defines a trade perfectly?
Image

Bury me a Royal.
Tavish
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterWeb Supporter
Posts: 11066
(Past Year: 70)
Joined: 3 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby great gretzky » Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:34 am

I don't buy the ignorant argument, since ignorance lies on a spectrum. There are always going to be winners and losers.. I understand "competitive balance" but its also not the point to be working to ensure everyone buy the winner is tied, and the winner wins by half a point. At some point, any trade person is going to be working with slightly less knowledge, its just the way it is. Not everyone has the same knowledge base. If the guy didn't know about Cueto, what good is the number one waiver position for him anyway? What is he waiting on? A stupid drop?
great gretzky
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafeholic
Posts: 3769
Joined: 3 Jun 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby flloyd » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:21 am

Tavish wrote:
Snakes Gould wrote:a definition of collusion:

collusion takes place within an industry when rival companies cooperate for their mutual benefit.

So you consider every single trade to be collusion because that defines a trade perfectly?


I think Merriam-Webster's definition is more accurate.

"secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose"
flloyd
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 597
Joined: 4 Jun 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Santa Monica, CA

Re: Trading for Waiver Priority = Collusion?

Postby noseeum » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:59 am

byfrcp wrote:Here's my question.

Why didn't you just wait to see who picked up Cueto and then do a trade with that person?

Essentially that's what you were doing, but you were trying to take advantage of someone who didn't have a full understanding of the potential value he was giving up. Either way you should have been offering the same amount of value to "#1 Waiver Ignorant Person" as you would have to "Person Who Really Picked Up Cueto".

While it isn't collusion, it could go under the competitive balance argument, which I don't understand how people can argue against. If someone loved Nomar Garciaparra, he was their favorite player for 10 years, and you knowing that information trade him Nomar for Prince Fielder, that's dissrupting the competitive balance, even though technically not collusion.


This is some really convoluted logic. He knows a guy with waiver priority 1 has access to a player he wants, so he offers a trade to guarantee he gets that guy. Why should he have to wait and wonder if the guy who gets him will trade with him? Anyone claiming him really wants him. There's nothing wrong with talking to the waiver priority #1 owner as if he already owns Cueto. It's the same as trading up for the number one draft pick in the NFL.
noseeum
Major League Manager
Major League Manager


Posts: 1697
Joined: 1 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: apz, felixad60 and 8 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Monday, Apr. 21
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Baltimore at Boston
(11:05 am)
Kansas City at Cleveland
(7:05 pm)
Cincinnati at Pittsburgh
(7:05 pm)
LA Angels at Washington
(7:05 pm)
Chi White Sox at Detroit
(7:08 pm)
St. Louis at NY Mets
(7:10 pm)
Miami at Atlanta
(7:10 pm)
Arizona at Chi Cubs
(8:05 pm)
San Diego at Milwaukee
(8:10 pm)
San Francisco at Colorado
(8:40 pm)
Texas at Oakland
(10:05 pm)
Philadelphia at LA Dodgers
(10:10 pm)
Houston at Seattle
(10:10 pm)

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