Lincecum for Rauch

[peartist]

Is that a fair trade?

This guy in my league needs saves, as he has no closers. He just traded for Rauch by giving up Lincecum. Thing is, having one closer is practically as good as having zero at this point. Everyone else has at least two closers in the league, which is a 13 team rotisserie.

I don't think he shopped around, as I know I didn't receive any offers and I definitely would have offered more than what he got for Lincecum. I would have given him Choo and any TWO of my closers (consisting of Street, Dotel, Contreras, and Simon). This guy is a veteran and has been in our league for at least five years. The guy getting Lincecum is notorious for being on the good end of trades, also.

My question is, what are the odds of collusion here? Any opinions?

[baegames]

As far as is this a fair trade, hell, no.

It sounds like someone made a bad trade. I hate to think collusion unless you have more evidence than a single bad (no matter how awful) a trade. It sounds like someone thought a Top 15 closer is worth a Top 5 Starter. A joke, but not collusion.

Help with mine:

viewtopic.php?t=411915

[BALCO All-Stars]

Is this a serious post? Who would trade Lincecum for ANY closer straight up...let alone too tall Rauch? This screams of collusion unless there are some crazy league settings where closers are more valuable then starters.

[hartmtown]

That's an indefensible trade and should be vetoed or voted down. If the commish fails to do so, I'd consider leaving, esp. if money's involved.

Do the managers know each other? If so, it's possibly collusion. If not, it's certainly idiocy.

[Jenken]

There had better be a veto on this. Not only is this bad for the guy getting Rauch, but it also screws the other teams in your league as well. What a joke.

[soty]

One of the dumbest trades I have ever seen. Wow!

[Hamburglar07]

Screams collusion. Veto the hell outa this.

[TBuck4401]

If the guy who gave up Lincecum is a 5 year veteran, then I don't know how any owner can not have the thought of collusion cross his mind. People get away with collusion because everyone around them wants to believe in anything but collusion. Lincecum for Broxton would be a horrible trade (although not enough to think collusion).

If this trade is not undone, I'd leave the league......hell, even "collude" with other owners to do the same. This kind of trade is not fair to everyone in the league, so I'm sure many will be on board to leave. Deals like this, regardless of motive, ruin the league for everyone.

First thing first: post on your message board demanding an explanation for the trade to see what kind of reasoning they come up with. No logical reason exists, so it'll be interesting to hear. Get others on board also.

[peartist]

Thanks for the replies. The guy getting Lincecum, as I've said, has been on the receiving end of some other iffy trades (can't remember them off the top).

I do remember him getting Michael Young back when Young was an all star a few years ago when he had the #1 waiver and Young was just DROPPED (might have been in 2005 or 2006).

Only reason I'm thinking about not vetoing is because the guy getting Lincecum is next to last, and the guy offering him up is in 1st.

I may ask for my 40 bucks back, though, if it isn't vetoed.

[krunchyfrogg]

It takes more than one veto to negate a trade. If you don't veto now, you have no leg to stand on if you ask for your cash back later.

Please help: viewtopic.php?t=411389