RotoGuru Baseball Forum

View the Forum Registry


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: Ethical dilema - Should I allow trade?

Posted by: The Pink Pimp
- [4532590] Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 02:56

I am the commissioner in a ten team private Yahoo 5x5 league and have come upon a situation that requires an ethical decision.

I was looking to add some pop to my roster and approached a team whose outfield consists of Bonds, Ordonez, & Brian Giles about the possibility of a trade. I said I was ready to offer a closer, starting pitching, and even an outfielder in a two for one deal to get Giles and he offered me the following trade.

Brian Giles for Kris Benson.

Yes I want Giles but is there any way that I can accept this trade and explain why it makes sense without sounding like Iraq's Minister of Misinformation?

The crux of this thread is not should I make this trade from a standpoint of am I better off with Giles or Benson because clearly Giles is the superior choice, but should I even accept the trade knowing how possibly unfair it is. Or should I do something else like allow the other players in the league to vote on the trade knowing that that won't be fair either since they will all veto it out of self interest since Giles will make my strong team even stronger.

Please feel free to comment or add other suggestions.


At the current time I have a ridiculously heavy outfield with 6 players however 5 of them are very similar.I am starting Jaque Jones, Crawford, Erstad and Randy Winn (At Utility) have Dave Roberts and Pat Burrell on the bench. Burrell is on the bench only until his bat wakes up and I expect good power out of him. The remaining 5 are all light power, good speed, decent average types.


Here are the complete rosters.

My Team: As you can see I have above average power in the infield and all speed in the outfield with 3 closers and good starters
Posada
Thome
Kent
Glaus
A-Rod
J.Jones
Crawford
Erstad
R. Winn
E.Burks (Bench)
D.Roberts (Bench)
Burrell (Bench)

Hudson
Prior
Glavine
Benson
McDougal
A.Benitez
Peavy.
Urbina (bench)
W.Williams (Bench)

His team: Great outfield, no healthy closers, decent starters, so-so infield.
Marrero
Palmiero
B. Boone
Batista
Renteria
Bonds
Ordonez
Brian Giles
Mondesi
Damon (bench)
McGriff (Bench)
Ventura (bench)

Morris
Buehrle
Moyer
F. Garcia
R. Reed
D. Wells
Dotel
Burnett
Nen
1biliruben
      Sustainer
      ID: 589301110
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 03:02
By posting this at all, you have answered your own question. No. Enlighten him, don't steal, particularly if it's just for fun and you plan on playing with him down the line. Your honesty could pay dividends down the line, not only with him, but with the rest of the league.
2cancermoon
      ID: 2239719
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 03:08
he doesn't even need Benson, he will hardly ever start the guy with his SP line up, I understand where you are comming from, it certainly would be vetoed, and i think this guy is a rookie or simply very bad, I think you should play fair and not allow him to do this, maybe if he needed Benson you could argue for it, but he doesn't, it is a complete waste for him. So NO you should be the man and give the poor guy and the rest of your league a fair break on this one :-)
3The Pink Pimp
      ID: 4532590
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 03:20
Yup, You guys are correct. But the Machiavellian side of me says take him now!

So the issue is quickly settled. I will not take the trade.

However I still want Giles so what is a fair counter offer?

A closer and a speedy Outfielder? (His pick of any except Burrell?)

I want to hang onto Benitez but I think Urbina and McDougal are about equal so I could part with either one of them.

Or should I just stand pat, forget about Giles, and wait for Burks and Burrell to start producing?

Thanks guys for keeping me from clicking on the dark side.

4Gary
      ID: 252142520
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 03:23
I agree this may not look like a fair trade but we don't know what the other guy is thinking. He may be looking to trade another player from his SP to someone else and may be in discussions with someone else to make a three way deal but to do it he needs to know this one will go thru.

My suggestion is to ask him and explain why you are asking.

Gary
5The Left Wings
      ID: 6142019
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 03:23
I think you should talk to that guy and see what he's thinking when he made that offer. It's all about communication.
You could make a counter offer that says, for example, Burrell and Benson for Giles.
6beastiemiked
      Sustainer
      ID: 29145419
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 03:28
I would offer Macdougal and Benson for Giles. He desperately needs saves.
7Toral
      Sustainer
      ID: 2111201313
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 05:02
Accept it. It looks dubious, but maybe the other guy believes that Kris Benson is the next Curt Schilling.

It's tough being the commisioner and getting a deal like that; but not accepting a good deal as a player, becuz you are the commish, is just one step away from manipulating for yourself good deals as a player, just becuz you are the commish.

Ethics demands that you isolate your thinking as commish from that as a player completely; it is trying to think like a player and a commish at the same time that may lead to corruption, and hence is verboten.

You should accept it, if you would as a (non-commish) player.

Ethically, I would go further, and substitute "must" for "should" in the abovbe paragraph.

Toral
8The Left Wings
      ID: 6142019
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 05:27
After reading what Toral said, here's my revised view on this:
First, as a player, you should accept the deal. That means you should let the other teams know that there is such a pending deal.
Second, as the commish, it's your responsibility to question the deal. Therefore you should talk to the other guy and tell him that Giles is worth a lot more than Benson right now. Then make sure that is really what that guy wants to do.

The most important thing is that you should keep everything as transparent as possible. You have to make it absolutely clear that there's no collusion involved.
9Mike D
      Donor
      ID: 8119166
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 06:56
Pimp, my answer would be that I agree with Toral. Can't say it any better.

In the past, I have re-worked pending deals involving myself because I didn't want the rest of the league to lose incentive, or not want to play again next season, etc.. But the fact remains that the commish should NOT have to act differently in a situation like this than another player. The commish just may CHOOSE to act differently, which any other player in the league also could do----like if one person rejected the trade because they felt it was too lopsided behind the scenes and countered by adding more.

An individual decision. Whether you are commish or just a league member, IMHO, it comes down to whether you want to make this deal as is or not. As Biliruben said, it sounded like you really didn't want to. Individual decision.

cancermoon-----"It certainly would be vetoed"-----some leagues, many leagues actually, believe that each GM has a responsibility to research and make deals that they believe are fair. This GM has made a poor offer, but in many leagues would now be making a trade and suffer the potential consequences. The league doesn't manage his team, he does. My 2 cents.
10cancermoon
      ID: 2239719
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 08:20
agree Mike D, my point is more in terms of it being unfair on the other players, if TPP gets Giles for nothing, how can the other managers feel they are in a fair competitive league if one guy gets studs for free virtually?
11Mattinglyinthehall
      Sustainer
      ID: 1629107
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 08:25
Depends on what you want to try to get out of this league, Pimp. As commish, would you veto or vote to veto that trade between two other teams?
12Mike D
      Donor
      ID: 38044119
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 08:29
I agree that would be one possible concern of accepting the trade, cancermoon. It comes down to whether the commish wants to make the trade and take the approach I mentioned at the end of my post (#9) that other people are free to make any deals they want, assuming the risk in doing so, or whether the commish wants to say trades like this will not be allowed in this league. Period.

I tend to think the commish should not be the sole decider of this. The league dictates what will be allowed. The first approach promotes trading. The second approach can be very frustrating. It can lead to the league making the deals, rather than the GMs. It isn’t real fun to have the league saying “I will protest that deal, but I wouldn’t protest McDougal and Benson for Giles (etc).” The league ends up MAKING THE DEAL, which takes responsibility and enjoyment away from the GMs, IMHO.

All that being said, in the almost over Hoops season I was in one heavily guarded league where trades were vetoed, re-worked, and even “made” by the league in the way mentioned above, and 3 leagues that were free-flowing, come as you are, why-did-that-guy-make-THAT-deal. But there were also some very balanced deals made in those 3 leagues. And a TON of trading. What league will Pink Pimp have? It depends on how he handles this deal, but also how the league, overall, wants it handled.
13biliruben
      Sustainer
      ID: 589301110
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 10:26
My comments came ignoring his commish duties. He shouldn't accept it, solely from a player's perspective.
14Matt G
      ID: 43047610
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 10:36
Simply here is what you should do:

1. Inform the guy that you think the trade is unfair and for what reasons, if comes back with reason for wanting Benson for other reasons, IE another trade, thinks Benson has so much promise etc. Then Maybe you just inform the league that this is happening and what not.

2. if the guy comes back and says, I didn't know I'm an idiot whatever, give him a counter offer, something like Jones and Macdougal for Giles. That way you get your pop and he gets a closer and Decent outfielder in return.
15Perm Dude
      Leader
      ID: 0059248
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 10:38
Make a counter. You'll feel better without all the analysis.

In leiu of that, just ask yourself what you would do if two other managers made the same trade. If you would veto it then don't make it yourself. As a commish you cannot act as a manager in a way that you the commish would not allow.

pd
16Toral
      Sustainer
      ID: 2111201313
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 10:49
If you would veto it then don't make it yourself. As a commish you cannot act as a manager in a way that you the commish would not allow.

Small disagreement, pd. I think it's perfectly acceptable for a manager to accept a trade and then tell the league, "I accepted this because it was offered. If I turned down Giles for Benson, then he'd offer someone else Giles for Kip Wells. I'll understand if this is vetoed -- in fact I'd vote to veto it myself. If we're vetoing trades on the grounds of imbalance, fine; if not I'm grabbing this one." I think an ordinary manager can do that, and so should a commish/manager be able to.
17Perm Dude
      Leader
      ID: 0059248
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 10:52
A commish isn't an ordinary manager, Toral. Ethically he has to act better than a regular manager. He can't abdicate his commish responsibilities in order to try to get a better deal. Putting it on the league to do his job on a deal in which he's involved merely pushes off the responsibility that he agreed to bear.

pd
18Mike D
      Donor
      ID: 38044119
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 10:52
I agree with that last part PD. If you would allow it to happen (the free-flowing/each GM on their own philosophy), then make the deal. If you wouldn’t (league involvement/agreement on all deals), then don’t.

I think it is important to clarify which way a league is going to be run early on. If it wasn’t done yet in this league, this is the time.
19Mike D
      Donor
      ID: 38044119
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 10:54
Oops---the last part of post 15.

Is the commish responsible to decide all of this, or is the league?

In most cases, I say the commish can decide a league is going to be one where trades flow freely and each GM lives with it. If vetoing is going to be an issue, my preference is the league makes the decision as a group, not the commish by himself.
20Texas Flood
      Donor
      ID: 40211014
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 10:56
pimp, i've played in the same rotisserie league for about 17 years and the words ethical and trade have never been used in the same sentence.

screw the guy to the wall! there's no crying in baseball;).
21cancermoon
      ID: 2239719
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 11:06
I was asked to join a pay league this year, but the reason i didn't want to join any competition where people get to trade players between each other is because it is never ever fair, trades like this would completely ruin the fun for me, I am into tough smart competition, and this just ruins it for the other managers who have absolutely nothign to do with it i reckon.
22The Pink Pimp
      ID: 5236914
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 16:48
Thanks to all who shared opinons on this topic. It turned out that there are quite a few views on how to handle trades as a commissioner and player.

If this was a public Yahoo league there is no way I'd even hesitate. It would be Benson for Giles in a flash.

But its not a public league and I do feel an obligation to keep it fair. In the past I have vetoed lopsided trades and felt that the Benson for Giles deal was too much in my favor.

The trade that eventually went through was Benson & Urbina for Giles, although the other managers may still complain about this. McDougal was offered as a closer but Urbina was preferred so the deal went that way.

Luckily for me Runnjhyys was still available in my league so I picked him up and Rocky Biddle (Montreal's new closer) is still out there so I may drop Erstad to pick him up as well as I like to carry 3 closers.
23Ref
      Donor
      ID: 100261311
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 17:48
Every team is different and has different needs. Perhaps he needs major help in cats that your guy will help him with and the guy he's moving isn't helping him in those stats he's packed in. Sometimes I get a player that is very good that I can't use just to be able to have trade bait for someone that can help me. Then I hunt for the team that needs help where that guy is strong in and has someone of about equal value that can help me. Accept the deal and if you get static from it--have both sides explain and offer a league vote on it. But don't reject it on itself.
24cancermoon
      ID: 2239719
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 20:20
ref you said
"Then I hunt for the team that needs help where that guy is strong in and has someone of about equal value that can help me."

That is the point, Benson and Giles are not even on the same planet to compare as equal value.
25Micheal
      ID: 412281014
      Wed, Apr 09, 2003, 21:23
Looks like Burrell woke up today.
Rate this thread:
5 (top notch)
4 (even better)
3 (good stuff)
2 (lightweight)
1 (no value)
If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time.

If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating.

If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here.

RotoGuru Baseball Forum

View the Forum Registry


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a random spelling of Mientkiewicz
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours11
Last 7 days55
Last 30 days88
Since Mar 1, 20071100601