Trade Dispute: Reggie Bush for Kevin Curtis and Rudy Johnson

Q:  I’m, Commish in a competitive league with 12 teams.  With two weeks to play, only one team has been eliminated from playoff contention.  This week, one team owner (call him “A”) agreed to trade Kevin Curtis & Rudi Johnson to the team eliminated (team “B”) for Reggie Bush, arguing that Curtis/Johnson (102 points in our league) was more than adequate consideration for Reggie Bush (50 points).  I denied the trade on the grounds that the eliminated Team B gained no competitive advantage in making a playoff run, but Team A obviously did.  Reggie Bush has started every game in our league, while Curtis and Johnson have ridden the pine more than 50% of the time combined.

A further review of the numbers reveal that while the point exchange was more than 2 to 1, Kevin Curtis racked up 52 of those points in week 3 and 20 in week 6, but other than that, has scored less than 2 points per week the remaining 6 weeks, AND Rudi Johnson has racked up 1 total point since week 3.  All of these players have had minor injury issues in recent weeks.  Reggie Bush is on a team gaining strength, and is now the featured back since Deuce McAllister went down in week 3 (and Reggie Bush has averaged nearly 8 points a game since taking over).  Kevin Curtis & Rudi Johnson are on teams in disarray and/or must overcome injuries and/or competition at their respective positions.

This trade did not pass my smell test, so I rejected it.  The league is now up in arms over the decision.  Tell me, was this a fair trade, or was I right in rejecting the trade?

A:  Hey guys.  The exchange of Curtis & Johnson for Bush is fair - there is no denying that.  It’s a classic example of giving up depth at multiple positions for a stud at on position (although using “stud” to describe Bush is a bit of a stretch at this point).  Regardless, Bush
has the most potential out of the group.  One thing to consider, however, is that a 2-for-1 trade like this frees up a roster spot that can filled with a player off the waiver wire, someone of the caliber of Randle El or Mike Furrey who could add value, so you can’t simply look at total points scored i.e. 102-50.

So the exchange of these players in a vacuum is fair, but you do need to consider the other factors.  Is this a keeper league?  Keeper league’s obviously change the situation since the eliminated team could be trying to strengthen their team for next season.   Most of
our non-keeper leagues have a built in rule that anyone mathematically eliminated from the playoffs is not allowed to make a trade.

It comes down to this.  Is there anything team B has left to work towards this season?  Can they bolster next season’s roster by picking up more keepers?  Does your league have a “toilet bowl” that non playoff teams compete in for some sort of prize?  If the answer is yes
to any of these questions, then the trade should be allowed.  If the answer is no, then the trade should be rejected since the only explanation of Team B’s participation in the trade is to help team A succeed - clearly collusion.  You should also use this opportunity to
enact a league rule that prevents teams eliminated from playoff contention from making a trade so you don’t run into the same problem again.