Fantasy Sports Ethics

One of the most frustrating things in fantasy sports is the trade process. Not so much trying to consumate a deal...rather....the hoopla of getting your trade proposal accepted by what can often be passenger seat GM's telling people how to run their teams. This is a MAJOR problem in public leagues where a trade is often vetoed (through the process of league vote) if there is even a whiff of one team getting the better end of the deal.

A recent example was a trade proposal I received in one league from the 3rd place team (I was 2nd at the time). We were both active and competing and there is no money on the line, so neither of us are looking to collude together and take advantage of anyone. The offer proposed to me was his Alfonso Soriano, Travis Hafner and Rich Harden for my Vladimir Guerrero, Chris Young and Al Reyes. I don't ask why people want certain players unless I'm offering a counter-offer, so I accepted the trade since I was significantly improving my offense and dealing from my deep relief pitching. The trade was rejected. Yes, I was receiving the better end of this trade on paper, but there are some things to look at: Soriano and Hafner were both struggling at the time of the trade. Rich Harden is ALWAYS on the DL. And Al Reyes has been a lights out closer this year. My trading partner had ONE relief pitcher on his roster (12 team league). He NEEDS a relief pitcher in order to have any shot of winning and he knows he has to pay the price.

I wasn't going to give up on this deal yet. Since Hafner is only DH eligible, I offered him a sweeter deal that involved my sending him Jim Thome, who is also only DH eligible. I sent Guerrero, Thome and Reyes for Soriano, Hafner and Oliver Perez. I don't think you can honestly look at this trade and say that it should be rejected in any league. Not even a day later, the trade was vetoed. The moment after it was vetoed, I received 3 trade offers for Vladimir Guerrero...all of them offering me MUCH lower than market value. It was at this point I realized the bush leaguedness of the owners in this league and I sent each one of them an e-mail telling them which sexual act they may perform on themselves. I then dropped my entire roster to the waiver wire and have not addressed the league since.

So when should we veto trades? I've been a commissioner in both hockey and football pools and my theory is: very rarely, if at all. This especially holds true in leagues that has a cash entry and prize. I've long stood firm in the belief that once someone has paid their entry fee, they have the right to run their team as badly as they want to. It's not anyone elses job to babysit them or protect them. We're not allowed to veto someone's horrible all-in call in a poker tournament, so why would we allow it in a fantasy league?

The way we've run trades when I've been commissioner is that all trades go through me. If a trade is accepted, I get an e-mail and I process it. I take a quick look at the talent being swapped and if its not blatantly ridiculous, I allow it, even if one team is getting the short end of the stuck. I've only vetoed one trade...it involved three legitimate superstar players being traded for a back-up goalie and two second line wingers. Between two friends. One at the top of the standings, the other at the bottom.

It is of my opinion that the only time a trade should ever be vetoed is if there is pretty clear evidence of collusion. That might be a GM in last place giving up and trading his best players to his friend for trash. Or it might be a one-sided deal between friends in some sort of move to help one friend win the league and the other friend getting a cut of the prize money.

The one complaint is that a bad GM that gives up his players for below value is creating an unfair advantage for his trading partner. However, the rest of the league has nobody to blame but themselves. Negotiating trades is a skill. Some people can simply negotiate a better deal than others. And its a skill relevant to fantasy sports, so why should someone be punished by not allowing them to use this skill? The other point is that actively negotiating and proposing trades is part of the routine of a good fantasy GM. If you're not working the lines of communication to get trades going, you have no right to complain about someone who is.

In all my years, I've never had a problem with allowing unfair trades. No major issues have ever arised. Have teams significantly improved and finished higher than they would have? Of course...that's the whole point of making a trade. I've also seen the opposite happen, where the guy thought to be getting screwed, actually comes out way ahead.