Page 2 of 4

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:25 pm
by TheYanks04
There is nothing wrong rules-wise or ethically with sending an oppoent help that will hurt a team you are chasing in the standings. That is part of the game. It is wrong to do it in deals that are not fair. Someone trades Dunn for Finley, it should get vetoed. Someone trades Hrs for SBs or pitching or whatever fairly to hurt the first place team...why not?

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:36 pm
by SteveP
TheYanks04 wrote:There is nothing wrong rules-wise or ethically with sending an oppoent help that will hurt a team you are chasing in the standings. That is part of the game. It is wrong to do it in deals that are not fair. Someone trades Dunn for Finley, it should get vetoed. Someone trades Hrs for SBs or pitching or whatever fairly to hurt the first place team...why not?


Of course! it's just a different set of ethics. I prefer to play by my estimation of how good players are in the categories we select. Except in narrow trial i don't want to game the system by manipulating the rules. I want to win by picking the best set of players...winning by other means is...well...winning by other means.

simple enough I would think. An ethical question too, I would think, after all, what are we buying into? A machiavellian experiment? Or a fanatasy baseball league? Do your mates understand that you'll manipulate the rules to the Nth degree? Do they know THAT is the game? not the picking ofgood players? If they don't, then it is a serious ethical question. Do I screw my mates to get my jollies? Pretty obvious answer there ethically.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:47 pm
by mbuser
your logic makes sense to me, but you can bet you'd have a tough time getting a trade through like that in a standard yahoo league, even with an explanation

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:52 pm
by wrveres
trading to sandbag your opponent has been part of the game since the games inception ..

It has nothing to do with ethics.
This is after all a game.
and people .... the game is numbers. Period!

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:55 pm
by TheYanks04
I do not see how trading Crawford for Thome for instance to a team who needs SBs and who could shave a point off your opponents SB score is anything but legit. The rules are set up for you to maximize points and the objective is to win. It happens all the time and no one complains about it. It is when Crawford gets dealt for Milton Bradley that the protests fly. Trades should be fair and help both sides.

There is nothing manipulative in any of this. It is the rules as they have existed since the beginning of Roto. There is no rule that says "Do not trade with someone to hurt your opponents score". You have to trade to address your team needs and improve yourself. I trade Crawford for Thome that is not hurting my team, it is changing its balance. If that is what I want to do that is my call and if part of my rationale or even all of it is to take a point off of the 1st place team's SB score, that is also fine. For me, it is the best way to improve my team's chances of winning and no devaluation has occurred, so what is the problem?

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:56 pm
by SteveP
wrveres wrote:trading to sandbag your opponent has been part of the game since the games inception ..

It has nothing to do with ethics.
This is after all a game.
and people .... the game is numbers. Period!


WooHoo! a different game than I play. but feel free to disagree.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:00 pm
by slomo007
SteveP wrote:
slomo007 wrote:I thought Yahoo's definition of fair trades says that if they "improve your team's position in the standing" then they're fair.

By hurting other teams not involved, you're improving your team, so I see absolutely no problem with it.


Sure, gaming the rules. If that works for you - the I'll get off theory - then by all means.

Not the way I live my life, but I am an idiot.


Here are the official Yahoo rules, it's perfectly ethical:

Yahoo wrote:To this end, each Public League fantasy team owner (Private Leagues are controlled solely by the league commissioner) agrees that, by joining the game, they will abide by the following regulations:


All league-related transactions will be executed with the intent of improving the owner's team and/or its standing within the league.
No owner may drop or dump players from their team for any reason other than improving their own team and/or its standing within the league.
No owner will engage in any action that may be deemed to be collusive (two or more owners agreeing to make moves that benefit one team, but not the other).
No owner will make any roster moves (including waiver claims, trade proposals, etc.) whose sole purpose is to hamper the play of other owners.
No owner will take any action whose purpose is to, in any way, interfere with fair play in a league.


http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/baseball/ ... es-26.html

Re: Roto Ethics

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:04 pm
by jbird669
[quote="Bloody Nipples"]
For the purposes of your answer, assume two different trades: one that is fair in that even fantasy talent is swapped, and also one that is not, such as Adam Dunn for Steve Finley.
[quote]

You call that an unfair trade? Let's check the stats of each player for the last 4 years.

PLAYER AVG R HR RBI SB
Finley .279 322 97 362 52
Dunn .249 313 118 273 37

Looks pretty even to me...

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:04 pm
by SteveP
I just want to say this as firmly as I can. Games are played by rules and I surely don't object to players using those rules.

BUT games are also about general understandings as to ways and means. We play games with friends because we all generally understand what the game is, that's how we have fun. When someone "understands" the game better by knowing some rule that can be played, that's not really the game you and your friends signed up for, is it?

Winning is such an empty thing, playing with your mates is so much better and more important than gaming the rules. Why be such a loser as to screw your mates that way? Play the frigging game, don't be an arse.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:07 pm
by SteveP
slomo007 wrote:
Here are the official Yahoo rules, it's perfectly ethical:



Yahoo Rules=ethics?

my god I have landed on another planet.