An Iconic Fantasy Baseball Community
Moderator: Baseball Moderators
Starkmadfan wrote: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.
The_Idiot wrote: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.
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 8 guests