Collusion(ish) problem- thoughtful responses appreciated

[Fighting_Emu]

Hey guys- looking for a little insight on how to proceed. Its a deep league with a lot of serious poolies so hoping for more than just a "quit that league dude" type of response

Last year an existing owner found a replacement for our 22 man team league. Things started out ok but then a Benn blockbuster went through and a few guys were legitimately mad but we basically just grumbled to each other. After that a series of bizarre trades went through- where a key piece seemed to be traded to the new guys team and then was subsequently traded back to the original owners for peanuts. Ill post all of them but the consensus was that it was collusion and they got called out. The new owner got very upset- explained that hes just learning the ropes and having fun trading- and then promptly quit saying he didnt want to play in a league with a bunch of guys who took fantasy hockey so seriously- better things to do with his time- blah, blah, blah- lol!

Our commissioner is relatively democratic and basically told us we need to decide as a group if we wanted any action taken and he'd consider it. The issue has basically died down but going into next season- its a little upsetting for a couple reasons. One is that theres a rumor that maybe these trade were intentionally done to better one team. The other is that on top of now having an absolutely stacked team- the winning party also got the exiting gms 1st rounder- which is- you guessed it... the 1st overall. This pick is especially relevant because two teams are dispersing this year as we condense down to 20- so he's looking at yet another superstar added to his roster.

There are a few issues here though:

1) Its hard to call collusion with no money changing hands. The team in question made the playoffs but didnt win. Now the other gm is out of the league so its hard to envision money being split down the line. The rumor that this was intentional is... well just a rumor at this point.

2) The guy who came out ahead is a pretty active GM and a likable enough guy. Hard to accuse him of collusion and wouldnt necessarily want him out of the league either.



So what do we do? Wed have to vote anyways- but what are our options? Is there a way to penalize or reverse trades that works out fairly? Is it a case where we should look at maybe asking for a boot? Or do we just suck it up and chalk it up to a bad run in with someone who just didnt take the league seriously? To be frank I feel like it was just one over zealous GM kind of taking advantage of a buddies naievete- but its tough because I feel like it hurts the integrity of our league. We all work hard to better our teams and this guy bolstered his lineup more than most of us can hope to do over several seasons.

Anyways- here are the trades:

Team Super Stacked gets Jamie Benn, Chris Phillips
Team Better Things To Do With My Time gets Sean Monahan, Reilly Smith, Andrew MacDonald
* I dont like this one at all but Sean Monahon has upside and ereilly Smith was on fire at the time. My thinking was that he wanted to put a stamp on his team and start re-building around Monahan- even if Benn is an ideal guy to build around if you're starting fresh.

Team Super Stacked gets Loui Erikkson, Jonas Hiller,
Team Better Things To Do With My Time gets Jaroslav Halak, David Perron
* This didnt look bad until...

Team Super Stacked gets David Perron (Didnt he just trade him away??)
Team Better Things To Do With My Time gets Brandon Dubinskey, Nikita Kucherov
* Kucherov was a waiver pickup and Dubinskey has far less upside but it least hes a legitimate pieve right? Until this happened...

Team Super Stacked gets Brandon Dubinskey (noticing a pattern here?)
Team Better Things To Do With My Time gets Matt Calvert
* At this point things are starting to feel funny.

Team Super Stacked gets Jonathon Drouin, Jaroslav Halak (For the hat trick!), and the 1st overall
Team Better Things To Do With My Time gets Derek Roy, Steve Downie, Dennis Wideman, Craig Anderson, Later pick (cant find it right now)
* So now Halak found his way back as well along with some ptretty damn desirable pieces in Drouin and the 1st overall. I understand theres hope for Roy and Downie yet- but were talking about key building block players going the other way. Keep in mind this is a friend whose been brought in and has now made 5 questionable trades. Im not omitting any either- each trade was lopsided clearly in the existing gms favor. I think everyone could have scratched their heads and lived with one bad one- maybe two- but thats 5- all clealry bad- lol!

Anyways- like i said- I actually like the Gm in question being in our league- hes active and a nice guy. Im not entirely sure any of this was pre-meditated either- but when you look at the trades- things just get a little foul smelling. Thoughts?

[doulos]

I sort of get the sense from the deals that Super Stacked smelled blood and went after Better Things to Do using classic trading tactics. Doesn't look like it's 100% collusion, but just a guy who doesn't really know better getting taken to the cleaners.

Doubt you can really do much now.

One potential idea for down the road is to put trading rules in place that prevent a player being traded back to his original team until a certain time period has passed - that would prevent any of these sorts of shenanigans down the road.

[Shoeless]

No problem with trade 1, not a good deal for team 2 but in a rebuild there is a case for it. Trades 2 and 3 can be lumped together wherein team 1 gets Hiller and Erikkson for Dubinsky, Halak, Kucherov - I actually like this for team 2. Dubinsky for Calvert - hmmm nothing here to get excited about. The last trade is brutal - is it collusion? Without further evidence, I don't see how one could call it collusion - could be just a really bad trade.

Like Doulos, I would look at this more as the one GM worked the other guy pretty good through a process. Kinda admire it in a way.

[Fighting_Emu]

I sort of get the sense from the deals that Super Stacked smelled blood and went after Better Things to Do using classic trading tactics. Doesn't look like it's 100% collusion, but just a guy who doesn't really know better getting taken to the cleaners.

Doubt you can really do much now.

One potential idea for down the road is to put trading rules in place that prevent a player being traded back to his original team until a certain time period has passed - that would prevent any of these sorts of shenanigans down the road.

I kind of agree and I really like that suggestion. If nothing else I can recommend implementing that going forward...

[Shoeless]

Actually don't see the trade backs as shenanigans - lots of times I give up a guy I really don't want to but have to in order to get a deal done and commonly look for ways to get him back if I can. As long as there is no collusion, why would you want to put any restrictions on player movement in trades?

[Fighting_Emu]

Like Doulos, I would look at this more as the one GM worked the other guy pretty good through a process. Kinda admire it in a way.

Lmao- I hear ya! I mean it gets problematic for me when he worked to get the guy in the league and then worked him over so hard. The same players all finding their way back smells fishy to me too. And lastly- if you are gonna argure re-build- how do you subsequently trade Drouin and the 1st overall (not to mention Benn :P)

[Fighting_Emu]

Actually don't see the trade backs as shenanigans - lots of times I give up a guy I really don't want to but have to in order to get a deal done and commonly look for ways to get him back if I can. As long as there is no collusion, why would you want to put any restrictions on player movement in trades?

I mean in that one it ends up being Eriksson and Hiller for Halak, Kucherov and Calvert. I have a tough time because every player involved- including Perron and Dubinskey were pretty solid keepers in our format- except for Kucherov and Calvert. It seems like the trades got diluted right down to the waiver wire.

That being said its a fair point. Generally its not shenanigans- just tough when you see it happen with 3 seperate players where the return is diminished (at least marginally) in every instance.

[Shoeless]

You know - if he was inexperienced, he is going to do dopey things. We all have our favorite trade partners - once you have one deal with a guy, it is always easier to do another. It may be there was some hanky panky going on, just sort of doubt it, but not knowing the personalities involved I can't get a feel for it.

When guys do well in trades, the rest of the league usually tastes a little bile, don't you think?

[Fighting_Emu]

You know - if he was inexperienced, he is going to do dopey things. We all have our favorite trade partners - once you have one deal with a guy, it is always easier to do another. It may be there was some hanky panky going on, just sort of doubt it, but not knowing the personalities involved I can't get a feel for it.

When guys do well in trades, the rest of the league usually tastes a little bile, don't you think?

Yea I agree- and I dont want to come off as sour grapes. I think it was one buddy probably getting the better of another buddy who just wasnt taking things to seriously. Im actually on the side of not acting at all here- just wanted some perspective.

In a keep 12 though its definitely bitter when one guy adds Hiller, Eriksson, Benn, Drouin and the 1st overall for guys he likely had no intention of even keeping- lol! It played out pretty organically but it doesnt "feel" very fair. Im willing to suck it up- just wanted to see if a fresh set of eyes could add some perspective to our leagues situation.

[Fighting_Emu]

And for the record- Im getting the impression we should just move forward with business as usual

[jross]

I can say for sure that the majority of those trades would have been vetoed in my league. You guys already allowed the trades to happen though correct? That's on you as a league for allowing that to happen in the first place.

[davidgoodburn]

Not sure you can do much now. The first four trades are bad but you can see some sort of rationale from the quitter. Buddy is takig advantage of him with players on hot streaks and talking him into it. The fifth trade is particularly bad and I'd wonder about the timing of that one. Quitter may have already decided to quit and that being the case why not leave the cupboards bare and help out a pal. Not much you can do about it 5 months after the fact. The only thing I can think is perhaps vote to have the dispersal draft seperate from the main draft. Still gets a quality piece from te main draft but not a top end superstar from the dispersal.

[MXHockey]

It seems the same team won every trade when you break it down. The first three trades aren't that bad, but the last two are awful.

Not sure there is a remedy for this..........I guess just carry on.

[donpaulo]

A league is only as strong as its weakest member.

Over the years in one of my leagues, the criteria of bringing in a new GM has become the most important issue. More than the draft or trades or in some cases the rules themselves.

This isn't about likability, its about competence. I mean I like/trust my neighbor but I don't want to go on vacation with him. On the flip side I enjoy my friend but I wouldn't want to live next door to him either.

Is there anything in the league rules about conduct ? If not there should be. I suggest a "return by invitation clause".

Do you have a competition/trade committee ? These would be other league members, not necessarily the owner/commisioner. Certainly nobody making a deal would be part of a group assessing it.

You need to create a policy so that when funky deals happen, there is a reaction. Such as contacting the GM and asking for their motivation in making a deal or series of deals.



here is a cut and paste/paraphrase from my apba league about being competitive

A) A Review Committee (RC) consisting of Mr X Y Z A & B will review the players in question.

B) If a majority of the RC feel the players are not meeting the standard of a "goal of winning" then the GM of the team in question will be contacted and asked for an explanation.

C) If the explanation passes muster, the issue is dropped.

D) If the explanation is not deemed acceptable by the league office, the team will be instructed to provide new, competitive players to the league office prior to its next game.

E) If new lines are not received by the league by the team's next game, the league office will assume control of the team and reset the lines to reflect the expected standard. The GM in question will be removed from the league immediately.

there is more too

1) Lack of participation/communication
2) Irresponsible management of team
3) Disrespectful or hostile attitude towards the league, league rules, other GM's or league officials

You are in a tough situation and I think many of us have been there as well. My suggestion might be a bit "ruley" but its worked for the better part of 10 years now.

Best of luck to you

[MXHockey]

In one my leagues there is a rule where two GMs are not allowed to conduct more than one trade involving the same player for a calendar year.

So all of the trades in your league would have been reversed or never happened. In saying that, chances are the two GMs would have done a similar deal with a different player regardless............