So, first off this is my 2nd time in fantasy with a league of
my closest friends. I'm still getting used to the unwritten rules of fantasy football so feel free to call me a dumbass.

With that said, I'm in a PPR league and am currently in 3rd place but was projected to not make the playoffs. I want to increase my chances of making it and realize my team sucks compared to the other players in the playoff hunt. I have no WR1 on my team (Sanu/Watkins/Parker/Pascal//Westbrook are my receivers) and wanted to trade to get a WR1 and a TE. I make a trade for Davante Adams and Zach Ertz for Watkins and Greg Olsen. The guy I traded with was at the time statistically eliminated from the playoffs.

There was no trade deadline implemented in the league or veto rule. The commissioner decided to put it to a vote and half the people not involved in the trade vetoed because it was unfair trade.

I guess I don't understand the the purpose of trading if this is in effect. I'm not a shoe in for the playoffs but I'm punished for trying to increase my chances to be a playoff team because it pisses off other people who aren't even contending?

For what it's worth, Brees is my QB, Ingram/Singletary/DJohnson RB's, Patriots D/ST.

Was I ****head for this trade?

Ok, so what else did you give the guy? That isn't a fair trade at all, why would he do that?

Bad commish.

Azariah said:

---

Changing the rules of any game after the contest is underway is bull***** You live with what you all agreed to do in the beginning. If something needs changing, change it for next year.

---

"Voting" on a trade isn't exactly a rule that needs to be implemented before. That is basically SOP in fantasy leagues and usually the people screaming about "MUH RULES" are the hucksters who try to push these bush-league trades through in the first place.

League vote for trades are terrible, everyone just votes against trades. Commish should have sole power to veto a trade, but only in cases of blatant collusion. These are of course just my opinions on the matter.

You didn't do anything wrong here imo. And i think the trade should stand. You league should definitely consider a trade deadline though. But I know in my ESPN leagues, the trade deadline isn't until this week, so that really doesn't play into this scenario.

We don't have a trade deadline either. (We do have a "no tradebacks" rule though)

We do have a provision that the lowest scorer each week has to throw money in based on how much they lose by. We have had no problems with guys not checking rosters each week or colluding with someone.

sawthemoffxx said:

---

Ok, so what else did you give the guy? That isn't a fair trade at all, why would he do that?

---

This. The trade makes no sense. I'm not sure what can be done about it, and I hate voting on trades. That's why it's just important to have a league of guys who don't make dumbass trades like that so that you don't have to worry about whether a trade is collusion or not.

The fact that you are asking if you did something wrong makes it seem like you and the other guy both knew that the trade was lopsided and he decided to do you a favor. If that's the case, then yes it's wrong. If that's not the case, then you did nothing wrong. But I don't see how it's possible that the other guy would think it's a good trade for him. So something seems weird.

Allen Gamble said:

---

I make a trade for Davante Adams and Zach Ertz for Watkins and Greg Olsen. The guy I traded with was at the time statistically eliminated from the playoffs.

---

why would he be making trades then other than for the purposes of collusion?

that plus the fact that both players you are receiving are indisputably superior than both players you're giving of the same position does not make for a good look

That's why we have a pot for high score of the week.

So even thought you may be eliminated there's still a reason for you to improve your team and put a quality lineup out there.

league voting on trades is a terrible rule for so many reasons.