Re: Should this trade be allowed or vetoed as collusion?
 

[ QUOTE ]
In general, if your team is bad, it's reasonable to make a trade where you are losing expected points but increasing variance. So trades that would be bad preseason may not be as bad midseason.

[/ QUOTE ]
I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure of the type of trade that would satisfy these conditions. Surely trading away LT, a single player who can put up anywhere from 10 to 40 in a given week, isn't one of them though.

[ QUOTE ]
This post shows you have little understanding of drafting dynamics.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, you're wrong.

(See, I can make baseless responses without explaining or supporting them too.)

Re: Should this trade be allowed or vetoed as collusion?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In general, if your team is bad, it's reasonable to make a trade where you are losing expected points but increasing variance. So trades that would be bad preseason may not be as bad midseason.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure of the type of trade that would satisfy these conditions. Surely trading away LT, a single player who can put up anywhere from 10 to 40 in a given week, isn't one of them though.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm not sure this qualifies either. It seems like trading one awesome player for several good players would decrease variance. I was mostly pointing out that people can make trades that are -PointEV but +WinningEV.

One type of trade that would satisfy this would be one where you sacrificed multiple bench guys for marginal starter improvement. You'd have way more injury exposure.

Another way might be to obtain QB-WR teammates and just hope that your WR goes crazy...you'd risk losing by a ton if they had a bad week, but if the WR catches 2 TDs one week then you get the QB points too.

Finally, you could target injury-prone or otherwise inconsistent players and just hope to catch the positive tail.

Re: Should this trade be allowed or vetoed as collusion?
 

Attempted thread hijack rather than starting a new one since this one seems to be about dead anyway and it is a similar topic.

Player A has several position players on bye this week and could use immediate help there but has two QBs with very good matchups next week.

Player B is very deep in position players but has only one QB on the roster in a deep league. His QB is on bye next week.

This league is a Yahoo total points league so there are no head to head match ups.

Player B offers to trade Player A a position player for either of his QBs with the condition that they "trade back" after next weeks games. Is this legal, with the rules, ethical, standard, what?

Re: Should this trade be allowed or vetoed as collusion?
 

Sounds fine to me.

Re: Should this trade be allowed or vetoed as collusion?
 

standard

Re: Should this trade be allowed or vetoed as collusion?
 

[ QUOTE ]
B's defense is that he likes the players he's getting (like he "likes" Colston and keeps playing him even though he sucks this year). Even if that's true, from the policies and documentation I've read, if the trade is clearly against a team's best interests (in the standings), it's not acceptable.

In other words, HE DOESN'T HAVE TO THINK HE'S CHEATING FOR THE TRADE TO BE UNACCEPTABLE.

[/ QUOTE ]

then there should be no trading, as no trade can ever be totally fair. you're an idiot if you believe and/or try to enforce that.

Re: Should this trade be allowed or vetoed as collusion?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
B's defense is that he likes the players he's getting (like he "likes" Colston and keeps playing him even though he sucks this year). Even if that's true, from the policies and documentation I've read, if the trade is clearly against a team's best interests (in the standings), it's not acceptable.

In other words, HE DOESN'T HAVE TO THINK HE'S CHEATING FOR THE TRADE TO BE UNACCEPTABLE.

[/ QUOTE ]

then there should be no trading, as no trade can ever be totally fair. you're an idiot if you believe and/or try to enforce that.

[/ QUOTE ]
There's a difference between a trade being completely fair and a trade benefitting both teams.