Commissioner reviewing trade - is this fair?

[Notashotasu]

Hello Dobber forum,

Let me preface the trade in question with some info:

This is our first year of the league in my signature. I am the commissioner and told members of the league that I would disallow one-sided deals for the first year as there are several people who have never played fantasy hockey before and I don't want the 2-3 that have to take advantage of them. Next year, with some experience I would only disallow deals that look like collusion.

The trade is Dustin Byfuglien + Nick Foligno for Matt Duchene + Brent Seabrook.

I see the trade as Duchene = Foligno in our format, and Byfuglien is >>>> Seabrook. Byfuglien was the 4th highest D man last year, and 7th before that.

Am I looking at this trade wrong? Is it fair enough? For more context, the manager trading Byfuglien knows very little about hockey, and the other manager is one of the 2-3 who knows his stuff.

Thank you!

[tropheus_guy]

i see Byf > Duuchbag
Nick Foligno > Seabrook but not crazy offside vetoable

[PenguinHunter]

I see it as a trade that you could veto for sure. Especially if you made the owners aware of it before the season. You analysis is correct.

Here is proof - https://www.nhl.com/news/fantasy-hoc...18/c-281505474

Buff #25
Foligno # 144

For

Seabrook #129
Duchene #161

[lucafen4]

have you asked the Byf owner what the hell he's thinking?

[PenguinHunter]

have you asked the Byf owner what the hell he's thinking?

My guess at this is....

I hear Seabrook's name all the time int he playoff's, he plays for Chicago... they always do well in the playoffs....

Oh yeah, and Duchene, wasn't he drafted really early??

Byfuglien? Has he ever played in the playoffs and Foligno who is he?

[2014olympicgold]

If the Buff owner wants to get younger, getting a talented player in Duchene is not a bad idea. He'll either be dealt or do well for the Avs. Buff's style is notorious for falling off a cliff.

I would just take the owners and give them both the info you think is prudent to the case and let them make the decision on if it should be an allowed trade.Being 4th and 7th in D-scoring in your format the previous yrs should be easy enough to find for the Buff owner, so he could just make the same deal next yr and there won't be any training wheels then.

[PenguinHunter]

If the Buff owner wants to get younger, getting a talented player in Duchene is not a bad idea. He'll either be dealt or do well for the Avs. Buff's style is notorious for falling off a cliff.

I would just take the owners and give them both the info you think is prudent to the case and let them make the decision on if it should be an allowed trade.Being 4th and 7th in D-scoring in your format the previous yrs should be easy enough to find for the Buff owner, so he could just make the same deal next yr and there won't be any training wheels then.

Just want to clarify... it is for a 1 year league correct? OP mentioned it was the 1st year of the league in signature and the signature says 1 year league. Otherwise I would say it is more fair trade if it was a keeper or dynasty league.

[Notashotasu]

If the Buff owner wants to get younger, getting a talented player in Duchene is not a bad idea. He'll either be dealt or do well for the Avs. Buff's style is notorious for falling off a cliff.

I would just take the owners and give them both the info you think is prudent to the case and let them make the decision on if it should be an allowed trade.Being 4th and 7th in D-scoring in your format the previous yrs should be easy enough to find for the Buff owner, so he could just make the same deal next yr and there won't be any training wheels then.

We're not a keeper league, so I don't know if getting younger does anything this year.

The Buff owner tried to drop him for Derek Dorsett before I reversed that. I then let him know that Buff is highly rated (4th last year, etc) and how to find that information. I just don't think he is too keen on looking that up. He also trusts the owner trading with him (they work together and are friends).

[horrorfan]

The one piece of advice is to very careful on how you decide on what you feel is a lopsided and vetoable deal vs perhaps favour one side but OK to go through. Where is the line?

You don't want to be too controlling on what managers can do, and that might put some people off. On the flip side I do understand why you have made that clear to the league.

Had any managers question your decision on how you would approach deals in the first year?

[lucafen4]

don't know if you can argue it's for the sake of getting younger when Seabrook 32, Byfuglien 32, Foligno 29, Duchene 27 (Jan 11,2018) ... someone's player evaluations are off on Byfuglien & Seabrook more like it

[2014olympicgold]

We're not a keeper league, so I don't know if getting younger does anything this year.

The Buff owner tried to drop him for Derek Dorsett before I reversed that. I then let him know that Buff is highly rated (4th last year, etc) and how to find that information. I just don't think he is too keen on looking that up. He also trusts the owner trading with him (they work together and are friends).

Ok, sorry i just assumed keeper with the names in the trade.

Second time doing this with Buff, he'll just do whatever then. Can't baby 1 GM the whole time. Especially in a 1yr league, let the bad GMs learn the hard way.

[lucafen4]

if he tried to drop him for Dorsett, he's getting a better return in this trade at least... lol...

I'm not sure you want this level of knowledge or lack of caring (it seems) in your league. ??

[Notashotasu]

The one piece of advice is to very careful on how you decide on what you feel is a lopsided and vetoable deal vs perhaps favour one side but OK to go through. Where is the line?

You don't want to be too controlling on what managers can do, and that might put some people off. On the flip side I do understand why you have made that clear to the league.

Had any managers question your decision on how you would approach deals in the first year?

That's a good point. That is why I am trying to gain as much information from different areas before I decide. Also, I have gone to the rest of the league to get votes on if they think this is too one-sided to go through and that sits at 4-2 for being vetoable.

I am still learning and not sure exactly how to balance (at least for this first year) letting people make deals and manage their teams vs keeping the league relatively fun and fair for everyone.

No managers questioned my approach to deals at the onset, but that will likely change if/when a deal gets vetoed.

[Notashotasu]

if he tried to drop him for Dorsett, he's getting a better return in this trade at least... lol...

I'm not sure you want this level of knowledge or lack of caring (it seems) in your league. ??

I didn't know his level of knowledge prior to the year. He was a friend of a friend.

We're not a super competitive league at the moment either. Weekly lineups, limited moves, and a lot of new players.

This year is supposed to be a kind of test/experience year for the new guys. I want them to learn, but also try to balance getting their team devoured by more knowledgeable managers.

[LawMan]

Generally I would say let the deal go through but given your explanation , and your up front warning about potential vetos for lopsided deals I think it would be reasonable to veto the trade.

I would add some caveats:
1. All the newbies get 1, 1! get out of jail free card. Tell the guy making this awful trade that its an awful trade and you won't bail him out again. Most likely in his first year he's going to make some bad deals, once he makes another deal like this and Buf takes off he'll learn to not make knee jerk reaction moves.
2. Keep the trades vetoed to the worst of the lopsided. I think this qualifies and as the season progresses there should be fewer as hot/cold starts are less evident.
3. Tell newbies to do some review before accepting deals.