Entries from September 2007 ↓

Q:  I sure hope you can help.  I am in an 8 team league so all managers were able to draft pretty good teams.  The commissioner’s roster has Tomlinson, Holt, Harrison, Randy Moss, Thomas Jones, Eli Manning and Baltimore Defense along with some decent depth.  A trade was brewing that involved Holt and Eli Manning for Santana Moss and Peyton Manning.  The other roster had Maroney, Barber, Gates, Marshawn Lynch, Ronnie Brown , Berrian and Vincent Jackson to go with his “trade” guys.  Trades are reviewed by the commissioner, but I did send out two emails to the league and three other mangers didn’t think it was fair.  I understand that a rough start by your studs is hard to get through, but it seems that this trade just gives too much power to one team.  We are all friends and are competitive, but some bad blood is starting to boil and you could really be the salve we need to bring harmony back to the league.

Thanks for listening.  I hope you can help.

A:  JimmyMeBoy!  Happy to help.  This is a tough one, but follow me through this logic.  First, when evaluating a trade, you can’t consider who else the teams involved in the trade have on their roster.  You have to look at the trade by itself.

Second, you have to realize that there is a difference between an unfair trade (that should be vetoed) and an uneven trade (that favors one team but should still be allowed).  Uneven trades still stink, and can affect the balance of your league, but that’s why you hopefully limit the number of idiots in your league.

That said, my first thought was no way - this trade is ridiculous.  The one team is clearly upgrading at QB from Eli to Peyton, a difference that is much more signficant than the difference between Holt and Moss.  But you have to look at the stats.  With a standard scoring system (QBs: 4pts per TD, -2 per INT, 1 pt per 50yds passing; WR: 6pts per TD, 1 pt per 20yds receiving) how does the trade matchup through three weeks in 07′?

Peyton: 879yds, 5TDs & 1INT (36pts)
Moss: 199yds, 0TDs (10pts)

Eli:  755yds, 6TDs & 1INT (31pts)
Holt: 210yds, 2TDs (23pts)

Do the math and the Eli/Holt side of the trade has actually produced more points 54-46.  Fine, but its too early in the season, what about last year?

Peyton:  4397yds, 31TDs, 9INTs (194pts)
Moss: 790yds; 6TDs (76pts)

Eli:  3244yds, 24TDs, 18INTs (125pts)
Holt: 1188yds, 10TDs (120pts)

In 2006, the Peyton/Moss pair came out on top 270-245, enough to consider the trade uneven, but not unfair or worthy of a veto.  Listen, I hate the trade too because Peyton is such a better QB than his little bro, but moreso on the field as opposed to in the boxscore.  The Giants will be playing from behind and passing often (while the Colts won’t) and while Jason Campbell could have the potential to help his receiver’s stats, Moss is streaky and Holt is one of the most consistent fantasy producers in the game.

Sorry, the trade should stand.

Q: We have an issue that we need to resolve.  The question is about making
uneven trades and roster limits.  We have a rule of 16 maximum players on
the roster but no minimum.  Actually our website has a minimum of zero
players and this was an oversight by us.  The dispute is that one team made
a 3-1 trade and now has only 14 players.  We have 4 add/drop transactions
per season and this team thinks he can pick up two free agents to fill out
the 16 man roster without dropping any players.  This should not be allowed
because this makes the trade uneven at the end.  That team should stay with
14 players because you should be able to go under the maximum roster limit.

Yes, each team can make up to a maximum of four add/drops during the entire
season.  The owner was expecting to use the add/drop method to pick up two
players but without dropping any.

A:  Ok, let’s first address the question of whether or not the trade should be allowed.  Can you trade multiple players for one player?  If your league website allows such a trade to be initiated and completed as it seems to in this case, then the answer is absolutely yes. As a law, when your league has not specifically agreed upon a rule that address the issue at hand, defer to the standard rules of your league website - whether it be Yahoo, Sportsline, etc.

With that settled, lets discuss the drop/add policy.  I don’t agree with the argument that the owner in question should not be allowed to pickup two players without dropping anyone.  As you stated, right or wrong, this does not violate your current settings for roster max and mins.  The fact that this owner is only adding - and not dropping - any players is a technicality that should have no bearing on the outcome.  Again, if your league website allows an owner to add a player, without dropping one, then this is clearly not a violation.

I’m sorry if this isn’t the response you were looking for but this owner is absolutely operating within the rulebook you’ve established.  I also think that your rule - only 4 add/drop transactions allowed per year per owner - is affecting your opinion.  Four transactions is a VERY low number and severely restricts all of your league members ability to improve their teams.  With such a premium on transactions I’m betting there is some significant talent available in the free agent pool and now that this owner is forced to use two of his four transactions - it makes the trade look all the more favorable to that owner.  You should consider increasing the number of transactions allowed considerable - or making them unlimited and charging money on a per transaction basis.  Finding the “diamonds in the rough” so to speak on the waiver wire is one of the most exciting aspects of fantasy football and really helps separate the good owners from the bad.

Q: This year I am in a new fantasy football league with new people I have not played with before. The draft was setup online and almost all of the participants were there for the live online draft. The rules were in place for each team to have a defense, not D/ST where the defense gets scoring from kick returns and punt returns.

Now we are a couple weeks into the season and the people that have the Chicago Bears and othere defenses who have good return men are complaining saying that defensive scoring should include the return touchdowns.

The commisioner has decided that we have a vote and if the majority (7 out of the 12) vote for it we will be adding return touchdowns to the defensive scoring.

I find this unfair because obviously the teams that have good return men are going to vote for the change. And more importantly because at the time of the draft it was not desegnated D/ST like it is in most leagues where the return touchdowns count towards the defense.

A: Hi Jim. Thanks for the inquiry. I rarely recommend bringing any issue to a vote during the season for exactly this reason - there is simply no way for your league owners to vote objectively. Every single person that votes on this issue, will be voting based off what benefits them personally - and not what is best for the league. That’s not a very healthy environment to make permanent changes to your league structure, is it?

If you used a live online draft, then the league had to have been created prior to the draft, correct? That means all owners had the opportunity to login to the league and see exactly how a Defense can score, in your league specifically. If that knowledge was accessible during or before the draft, then there is absolutely no way your league should change the rule three weeks into the season.

Would you change QB TDs from 4 to 6 points or viceversa at this point? Its the same premise and I bet I could predict how a Peyton Manning owner would vote compared to how a Kyle Boller owner would vote in that scenario. You have to avoid changing rules midseason because of subjectivity. Once you change one rule, the door has been opened. The ruling on the field should stand in your case, leave the rule as it.

Following up on yesterday’s post, let’s see how another expert stacks up against ESPN’s Eric Karabell. Today I’ll look at Jamey Eisenberg, a fantasy writer for Sportsline.com.

Week 2 Fantasy Football Expert Review: Jamey Eisenberg, Sportsline.com

Recommended starts:
QB - Favre, Delhomme, Romo, Brees, Green, Hassleback
RB - A. Peterson, R. Johnson, Barber, Henry, McAllister, Jones-Drew, B. Jackson
WR - Walker, Chambers, Galloway, C.Johnson, Berrian, Driver
Recommended sits:

QB - Campbell, Schaub, McNair, Rivers, Bulger
RB - Lynch, A.Green, Dunn, Maroney, T.Jones, T.Bell, L.Johnson
WR - Curry, Coles, V.Jackson, D.Carter, Burress, Horn

Eisenberg went 6 of 11 at QB, 10 of 14 at RB, and 10 of 12 at WR - 26 of 37 overall or a success rate of 70%. A slight edge over Karabell’s 68% from yesterday’s post of fantasy football experts.

I think both experts took some chances with their picks - instead of recommending Peyton Manning as a start. I especially like Eisenberg’s rec’s to sit Maroney, Lynch, T.Jones and LJ - all quality starters - and all of whom performed poorly in week 2.

Here’s the real golden nugget of this exercise. In instances where both Karabell and Eisenberg recommended the same player to either start or sit (Favre, Brees, Barber, Galloway, Chambers, T.Bell, V.Jackson, Horn, McNair, Rivers, D.Carter) they were money - 10 for 11 or 91%.

Moral of the story - Cross reference the fantasy recommendations you read each week before taking action and you should do just fine.

As fantasy football owners, we are on an eternal quest for knowledge. Who to start, who to sit, which sleeper has a favorable matchup, which stud is destined for failure. We have preconceived notions about each player that we’ve developed from years of first hand experience but more often than not we do what any information-crippled individual will do when looking for answers - we ask the experts.

In response, blogs, podcasts, sports radio and Sportscenter have all increased their output of fantasy football advice, but how do we sift through this barrage of stats and tips - and who, more importantly, are these experts we entrust with our fantasy football seasons.

Week after week, it is easy to find advice on who to start and who to sit, but no one holds these experts accountable after the fact. Periodically this season, I’m going to review this “expert advice” and report back on how the predictions fared.

This week, I will start at the top and look at Eric Karabell’s recommendations for week 2. For my money, Eric is cream of the crop when it comes to fantasy football analysis so lets see how accurate his recommendations were.

This is how it works - I’m looking at QBs, RBs and WRs only. If the expert said to start a player and they ended up in the top 12 for QBs, top 24 for RBs or top 36 for WRs during a given week they get a point. Likewise they get a point if the recommended a sit and the player did not rank within the above metrics for the given week. As we continue this exercise we can start to adjust for which experts only offer safe picks and which experts take some chances.

Week 2 Fantasy Football Expert Review: Eric Karabell, ESPN.com

Recommended starts:
QB - Brees, Ben Roeth, Kitna, Favre, Schaub
RB - S.Jackson, L.Johnson, Barber, Bush, C.Brown
WR - Moss, A.Johnson, R.Brown, Galloway, Branch, Burress, Chambers

Recommended sits:

QB - Leinhart, McNair, Culpepper, Rivers
RB - R.Brown, D.Ward, T.Bell, B.Jackson, C.Williams, Norwood
WR - V.Jackson, Berrian, Horn, D.Carter

By the scoring system outlined above - which is based off standard scoring - Karabell went 6 of 9 at QB, 5 of 11 at RB, and 10 or 11 at WR - 21 of 31 recommendations overall or a success rate of 68%. Not bad, tune in each week to see how he stacks up against other experts.

Q: Our fantasy football league is through Yahoo. We have an argument where some participants believe that a return touchdown should count for the defense. Others believe a return touchdown should count for the player who returned the touchdown.

If you enter our league and go to League > Settings and look under stat categories, you will find listed that a return touchdown counts for 10 points. However, it does not indicate if the points are awarded to offense, or defense. Some people interpreted it as defense and others interpreted as offense. These interpretations were carried into the draft without being discussed. Therefore, people drafted according to their interpretation of the points and now we have a dispute.

Personally, I do not see how it can be interpereted as offense when you break it down. In the majority of fantasy football leagues that are played special teams points count for the defense, listed as defense/special teams (DST). On the situation of particpants drafting players as returners… you cannot draft many players who do returns i.e. Ed Reed, Terrence McGee, Allen Rossum. So, how can a person assume individual players will recieve points for return touchdowns when you can’t even draft some of them.

Please help us out… We had participants draft defenses, and other participants draft individual players thinking in opposition to where the return TD points would fall. Should return touchdowns count for Defense? Offense? Both? None?

A: Thanks for getting in touch with Fantasy Football Disputes. We have taken some time to evaluate your situation and have some suggestions for you and your league. Looking at the history and evolution of fantasy football, I am sure you can remember the days
when individual players would routinely get credit for not only return touchdowns, but yardage as well. In the past few years we have seen a shift in scoring systems to include return TD’s, and special teams in general, with the defense, hence DST. With that said,
there are still many leagues that operate on older rules and not making the scoring clear before the draft will lead to inevitable problems, such as what your league is experiencing now. While many of us here at Fantasy Football Disputes agree that return TD’s should no longer be credited to offensive or individual players, not specifically and distinctly
declaring that before the draft may put some or all of your owners at competitive disadvantages due to their drafting strategies on their interpretations of the
rules. In this particular case our proposed solution would to not include any return TD’s within your scoring system this year. Going forward, you should have a league vote to determine how you would like to address this in next and all future years. We are
always a proponent of having a written constitution for your league which outlines these issues and hopefully in the future we can avoid problems like this. You can even use our guidelines for creating a constitution on our website. We hope you find our
solution helpful and please feel free to contact us at Fantasyfootballdisputes.com for all of your fantasy sports needs.

Q: Hello, I seem to have a problem with a trade made in our league yesterday and I knew this could create an uproar, so I’m looking for a solution other than my own as commish.We have a 12 team keeper/franchise league. Our league has been around for 14 years, but still seems to get in a tizzy when trades are made including certain owners.

Here is a brief rundown of our rules with regards to keepers. We have developed a rather intricate set of rules for drafted rookies.Any rookie drafted in Rounds 6-10 can be “franchised” and kept at their round selected for EVER. Each team can only “franchise” 1 player.

The next set of rules pertains to “redshirts”. Any rookie drafted regardless of round can be “redshirted” following Wk 5 and be able to be kept as an 8th round pick the following year. By “redshirting”, the said rookie CANNOT play after Wk 5 and will reap the rewards the following year. Obviously some strategy is involved and some risk. For example, Adrian Peterson was drafted in the 4th Round this year. He can be in a teams starting lineup until Wk 5 and benched for the rest of the year and will be an 8th round pick next year, then 7, then 6 the following year. If he chooses to play him the whole year he would become a 3rd, then 2nd and go back into the draft after the 3rd year. The “redshirt” rule gives the owner a chance to have him for 4 years instead of 3, but can only play him for the first few weeks of the season but also retains him at a much better draft pick. We are only allowed to keep a max of 4 players, as long as 1 is either a franchise or redshirt.

Now to the trade at hand. Team A was offered Steve Smith (Car) and Derek Ward (NYG) from Team B for Jacoby Jones, James Jones, and Wes Welker. On the surface this seems very lopsided, but with our rules….is it?

Steve Smith goes back into the draft pool next year (3 year max for vets). The 2 Jones are drafted rookies in the 9th and 10th rounds respectively. Only 1 can be “franchised” for the next year(actually his career), while the other could be “redshirted” at 8, 7,6 for the next 3 years. The value for team B is obviously the players keeper status’, which could prove to be very valuable.Team A is absolutely getting stronger for the current year, but only for this year.

We are now going into the 2nd week of the year, so there is abslolutely no sense of “giving up” by either of the teams, or collusion. All teams pay a $200 entry fee, so pride is at stake as well as a handsome payday. Hopefully I have presented you with enough info to help in this case. Thanks, Vladimir.

A: Thanks for question. This is a good example of how important it is to consider specific league keeper rules when evaluating a trade. In this instance, the potential for keeping Jones and Jones adds enough value to that side of the trade to make it fair (plus Welker is going to be a solid option this year - 75% of Smith’s totals is not out of the question). Even in your format I’d still want to be on the Smith/Ward side, but remember that your job as commish is not to ensure all trades are smart decisions for the two owners involved, just that the trades are not overtly lopsided. This one should go through.

Q:  Our fantasy football league splits up defense and special teams.  A special
teams touchdown (punt return, kick return, blocked field goal return) gets
your team 10 points.  Giving up one of these makes you lose 10 points.   A
defensive touchdown is worth 5 points.  The last two years, ala Chicago
Bears, we have had a “missed field goal returned for a touchdown”  We have
placed it as defensive touchdown.  In your opinion, would you classify this
as a defense or a special teams touchdown.

P.S. Our league commissioner has a team involved so it would be
inappropriate for him to make a ruling.

A:  I agree 100%, this is a defensive touchdown.  The simply way to split up defense and special teams is to comprise the latter of kick and punt returns only.  A field goal block is simply one of many possible results of a defense’s performance - like a sack or an interception.  That the offense has decided to kick instead of run or pass does not change the classification of the defensive unit to the special teams unit.