GoatCurse03 wrote:Proving it is always the problem because any time someone challenges a deal, the traders can always, always make an argument about how they value the prospects, or minimize an injury to get a deal to fit within the range of acceptability.
If you suspect these two do it, you could be proactive in the future. By early June, hit the lesser team with offers for the handful of players that you think they are going to trade to the better of the two trading partner's teams. There probably aren't more than a handful on that team. If nothing else, you'd then have an argument to present to the league if the players you offered on are later traded for lesser value. It will also have a chilling effect on their deals if they are colluding in this way and they know you (and hopefully others) are on to them. I'm not sure if this would work though because you said their deals are "fair".
If you are this concerned, it can't be too much fun being in this league.
I've actually tried this - basically preempting the team I knew would be dumping and made offers. Next thing I know, the two of them are announcing a trade for the players I asked about and the offer is commensurate with what I offered. Basically, I set the market, the other guy matched and got the players I was after.
Even more fun then comes when the dumping team then asks if I want lesser players for the same players/prospects I just offered for the better players - almost as if I am now desperate to get "somebody" that I'll make a bad deal.
As for being concerned/having fun, I have debated staying in the league. They have "won" only once in the six years, but have finished in the money all 6. Beating them was sort of a sweet victory but was easy because they stunk at player evaluation. However, they are getting better to the point it is a lot of work and the fun is disappearing even if they are beaten.
My "concern", if that, is simply whether this type of behavior is something we should address as a league or whether to let it go. I honestly don't think anything can be done (other than kick them out - which has only happened once in 12 years). Therefore, I was trying to get a feel what outsiders thought in terms of whether the behavior was collusion. If so, the commish might address them directly.
But he and I are alike that we don't presume collusion unless the evidence is overwhelming, so neither of us has said anything to the two. However, a couple of the older league members are irate (although about half either don't care at all or else haven't noticed/said anything) which is why I was seeking outside opinions. The commissioner doesn't want to say anything without proof for fear of upsetting them/causing them to leave and to some extent, I agree. However, if the irate league members quit, then we're in the same boat.
Anyway, thanks for the comments. I've passed them on to the commish (who, AFAIK, is not a member here) to help him in deciding if he's going to do anything.