The earlier question about "handshake deals" made me think about a potential situation in one of my leagues-
I'm commish of a 14-team 6x6 dynasty league. I had Moustakis in the minors, and right before Hosmer got called up I traded one for the other. After Hosmer's hot start, I traded him ($1), Bruce ($12), and Markakis ($12) to one of the bottom-dwelling teams for Adrian Gonzalez ($41), Abreu and Torii Hunter (each $2, since dropped). I went on to acquire some other pricey guys I had a good run and was able to fight my way into 3rd place, but now I have to shed salary for next year (each player goes up $3).
The team I traded with has a bunch of good, young, cheap players, but lacks an elite bat (or elite pitcher, for that matter) going into next year. I don't know how keepers are going to shake out next year, but it's probable that most of the top talent is going to be kept. The idea of a trade involving sending back Gonzo for Hosmer has come up, and seems to make sense for both of us in a lot of ways (I shed salary, he locks up a top hitter). The problem is, of course, it makes the earlier trade look like a rental, even though it was not at all intended that way, and both trades could/would stand on their own terms.
Two complicating emotional factors:
- I'm commish.
- This is the first year we're keeping players. There is bound to be some sensitivity around off-season trades as people juggle salaries.
Would that trade come across too weaselly?