Chris Johnson for Rashard Mendenhall (a keeper for next year) Trade?
I’m a Commish and need some outside help on whether to allow a trade or not. We have a modified keeper rule where you can keep one player for one extra year if they were drafted in the 6th round or later. We allow keepers to keep their eligibility if traded. The trade in question is Chris Johnson for Rashard Mendenhall. CJ is on a team out of the running, Mendenhall is keeper eilgible. We have two very distinct schools of thought on this. One is that the potential of a good keeper balances an otherwise unfair trade and the other is that all trades should be equitable and judged on the value they bring to each team at the time of trade. My league is full of high maintenance cry babies so some wise outside help is greatly appreciated. Our trade deadline is tomorrow at 5pm. Thanks.
END——–
This is a fairly typical dispute for a keeper league. One team, obviously still in contention for winning this year, is trading a decent player, Mendenhall, who has keeper value for next year, for Chris Johnson, a top running back. I sympathize with the teams (probably the other teams still in contention for this year) that complain that this is unfair to them in that one team will now have a pretty dominant lineup comprised of the other studs that got him into contention, and now C. Johnson too. But that is the nature of keeper league trades. In keeper leagues, the teams that are out of contention will (properly, in my opinion) try to take advantage of the teams vying for first place, in order to build a team for next year and the future. Whereas this trade might very well affect the results this year, I would suggest that teams that are overly concerned with this year’s finish do not adequately appreciate the objectives in a keeper league—which is to try to contend not just once, but year after year.
I agree with the school of thought that the potential of a good keeper balances an otherwise one-sided trade. When evaluating the trade, you should focus more on whether there was collusion between the trading teams in an attempt to prevent another team from winning, as opposed to a good faith attempt to improve both teams, whether it be for this year or next year. I can’t say that this trade is so imbalanced as to disrupt the fairness of the league in the long run. Teams must be allowed to take chances and build for the future. The trade should be allowed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Thank you for using the services of www.FantasyDispute.com