Is this Collusion? Topic

erffdogg
Posts: 0 (0)
Hall of Famer
57 1 114
Prospect
collusion
12/29/2009 9:39 AM
jtrinsey
Posts: 237 (0)
All Star
1 4 2 30
Rookie
Quote: Originally posted by tecwrg on 12/29/2009A hypothetical situation:Team A has the first pick of the amateur draft.  They want a particular position, but are not seeing anybody they like at that position.  They "shop" the first pick around.  They make a gentleman's agreement with Team B . . . Team A will draft player X and trade him to Team B next season in return for player Y.Collusion?  Team A is performing a transaction (drafting a player) at Team B's request, so it could fit a very strict interpretation of the definition of collusion.Would it make a difference if Team B could not see Player X in their draft list as opposed to they could see him?This is very similar to the discussion a couple of weeks ago about pre-arranging a deal for the first pick in Rule 5, but with a twist (being able to see or not see the player to be drafted).For the sake of argument, assume no "funny stuff" between the two owners making the deal . . . they're both on the straight and level (i.e. not aliases, etc.)


At the risk of staying on topic:

In the amateur draft, I think it is collusion because it gets into the area of sharing projections:

Guy with 8M in college/hs scouting: "I don't see anybody I like as the 1st-pick, anybody want to work out a deal?"
Guy with 20M: "Draft X player"

Well then 8M guy just drafts that guy and keeps him. I'm not saying that is necessarily taking place in this specific scenario, but it opens the door to that possibility. What about saying, "My 20M scouting predicts this guy to be pretty good, bump him up in your projections and if you get him in the 2nd round, we'll work out a deal." Too much of a slippery slope.

Rule V I'm fine with because everybody can see all the players and they have already gone through most of their development. The collusive part of the amateur draft is that one party is gaining information about a player they would have otherwise not been able to get. There's no information swapping in the Rule V scenario. It's more akin to a sign-and-trade. Some owners are for it, some are against- I personally have no problem with it though.
12/29/2009 9:41 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
You actually make a good point.

"Yes, draft Player A and I'll give you Player B."
"Player B isn't good enough. I guess we can't work anything out."

Drafts Player A and keeps him.

It could be a way to get opinions on players in the draft.
12/29/2009 9:44 AM
snake_p
Posts: 0 (0)
Hall of Famer
3 60 2
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 12/29/2009
A hypothetical situation:
Quote: Originally Posted By sculley on 12/29/2009
I posted the offer in world chat
Hmm, so it wasn't a hypothetical situation at all. Tsk, tsk, tec. But thanks for what might become an interesting thread.

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 12/29/2009
Collusion?
No. Two guys trying to work out a deal to improve their clubs is not necessarily collusion. Your example is not collusion.

And, finally ...

Quote: Originally Posted By sculley on 12/29/2009
Mikey, I still think you're an angry little troll. You're the type of person people act nice to because they don't want to hear you ***** and whine, then when you leave the room everyone has a field day. You provide a lot more entertainment to your "friends" than you think.
Well, now you've let the cat out of the bag, Mr. Bigmouth.
12/29/2009 10:30 AM
spudpicker
Posts: 66 (0)
All Star
4 36
Prospect
"Well then 8M guy just drafts that guy and keeps him."

But doing this requires that you trust the other person, trust their projections, their opinion of the player, etc.

If someone approached me, I'd consider giving false info.

I don't think discussing trading picks before they're even picked is bad, but certainly there can't be anything good if one player doesn't see the player the other is discussing.
12/29/2009 10:40 AM
firemanrob
Posts: 69 (0)
Hall of Famer
69 39 16
Prospect
Its not part of the game (trading draft picks) and theres many reasons its not a part here on HBD, but IRL teams trade for future considerations because they are unable to trade draft picks. I think its probably borderline collusion though given the current structure of HBD.
12/29/2009 12:44 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By firemanrob on 12/29/2009Its not part of the game (trading draft picks) and theres many reasons its not a part here on HBD, but IRL teams trade for future considerations because they are unable to trade draft picks. I think its probably borderline collusion though given the current structure of HBD.


IRL, teams have many things to concern themselves with regarding the future. Jobs are at stake, fans are screaming, etc, etc. Mistakes are huge.

IHBD, you do something dumb and join another world.
12/29/2009 12:50 PM
firemanrob
Posts: 69 (0)
Hall of Famer
69 39 16
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 12/29/2009
IRL, teams have many things to concern themselves with regarding the future.   Jobs are at stake, fans are screaming, etc, etc.  Mistakes are huge.  IHBD, you do something dumb and join another world.
I was thinking that in HBD its too easy to ruin a team and trading draft picks should not be a part of the game. To piggyback on that, it would be just as easy to trade picks after the draft is completed and ruin a team so the current setup (having to wait until the next season) is fine with me.

I think if you choose to arrange trades for certain players, then you are choosing to do something that I think many would consider to lack integrity; however, if you do it then do it and don't say anything because most would likely not know about it. "If you're going to cheat, just don't get caught. And may your soul burn in hell"
12/29/2009 1:06 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By firemanrob on 12/29/2009
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 12/29/200
IRL, teams have many things to concern themselves with regarding the future. Jobs are at stake, fans are screaming, etc, etc. Mistakes are huge.

IHBD, you do something dumb and join another world.

I was thinking that in HBD its too easy to ruin a team and trading draft picks should not be a part of the game. To piggyback on that, it would be just as easy to trade picks after the draft is completed and ruin a team so the current setup (having to wait until the next season) is fine with me.

I think if you choose to arrange trades for certain players, then you are choosing to do something that I think many would consider to lack integrity; however, if you do it then do it and don't say anything because most would likely not know about it. "If you're going to cheat, just don't get caught. And may your soul burn in hell"


It's not easy to ruin a team. You really have to put some effort into it. Teams that are neglected are often in better shape than those ran by dumbasses who have no clue.

Nonetheless, if you do manage to ruin a team, you just pack up and move on.

The current set-up mimics MLB.
12/29/2009 1:09 PM
zbrent716
Posts: 1970 (0)
Hall of Famer
90 1 58 77
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by tecwrg on 12/29/2009A hypothetical situation:Team A has the first pick of the amateur draft.  They want a particular position, but are not seeing anybody they like at that position.  They "shop" the first pick around.  They make a gentleman's agreement with Team B . . . Team A will draft player X and trade him to Team B next season in return for player Y.Collusion?  Team A is performing a transaction (drafting a player) at Team B's request, so it could fit a very strict interpretation of the definition of collusion.Would it make a difference if Team B could not see Player X in their draft list as opposed to they could see him?This is very similar to the discussion a couple of weeks ago about pre-arranging a deal for the first pick in Rule 5, but with a twist (being able to see or not see the player to be drafted).For the sake of argument, assume no "funny stuff" between the two owners making the deal . . . they're both on the straight and level (i.e. not aliases, etc.)

For me, the initial scenario is not something I'd consider collusion. Assuming both owners have their own scouting reports for Player X (and aren't comparing notes), this is very much akin to the Rule 5 scenario in my mind. The main difference is the waiting aspect, which is why I'd be very cautious about entering into such an agreement personally, and would probably only even consider it with another long-term owner who I am confident (barring a RL problem) would be returning to the World and would honor the deal.

If Team B cannot, however, see Player X, then I think the "line" over into collusion has been crossed. If Team B cannot see Player X in his draft list, then he is unable to draft him (obviously) and has no idea of the projections of the player. The only indication of Player X's value would have to come from Team A, and there we have gone into the improper sharing of information that Team B did not budget to obtain.

The "performing a transaction at the request of another team" fitting into a very strict interpretation of the definition of collusion is nonsense, and is just the result of people not knowing what the word collusion means.
12/29/2009 1:47 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Since my intent in starting this thread was to try to keep it focused on the topic at hand and not turn into a shitstorm of accusations, I'm seriously considering going on a redline spree to clean up the thread.

So delete now if you don't want to be redlined.
12/29/2009 1:54 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Well, now. That was fun.
12/29/2009 2:46 PM
firemanrob
Posts: 69 (0)
Hall of Famer
69 39 16
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
12/29/2009 2:57 PM
domiisgod
Posts: 19 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 2 1 16 118
Prospect
Red is such a pretty color.
12/29/2009 5:18 PM
jimmystick
Posts: 827 (0)
Hall of Famer
88
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 12/29/2009Collusion.   You can't trade for future considerations.   Owner turnover should tell you that it's not "fair" to incoming owners.  Of course, if they keep their yaps shut and just do the deal next season, no one knows.

I wouldn't have a problem if somebody in my league did that, but I'd never do it for that reason. What if the person doesn't renew, or renigs on the agreement? I wouldn't do it, but if you want to, go ahead.
12/29/2009 6:43 PM
◂ Prev 123456 Next ▸
Is this Collusion? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.