Being deceitful?

[bawilks]

What’s everyone’s option on trading players when you get breaking news that is potentially damaging for a player?

I’ll use the recent Tyreek Hill situation. If a hill owner say got the news as soon as it broke and then tried to trade him and the other owner was not aware of what happened yet.

[Dookmarriot]

What’s everyone’s option on trading players when you get breaking news that is potentially damaging for a player?

I’ll use the recent Tyreek Hill situation. If a hill owner say got the news as soon as it broke and then tried to trade him and the other owner was not aware of what happened yet.

I don't know if it's deceitful, but I always do a quick web search of any players I get offered before I accept a trade.

[Dr.Graffin]

What’s everyone’s option on trading players when you get breaking news that is potentially damaging for a player?

I’ll use the recent Tyreek Hill situation. If a hill owner say got the news as soon as it broke and then tried to trade him and the other owner was not aware of what happened yet.

It's every owner's responsibility to be informed about the players they are receiving in a trade. It's not your trade partner's responsibility to break down the pros and cons of a trade for you.

[Prison_Mike]

What’s everyone’s option on trading players when you get breaking news that is potentially damaging for a player?

I’ll use the recent Tyreek Hill situation. If a hill owner say got the news as soon as it broke and then tried to trade him and the other owner was not aware of what happened yet.

I don't know if it's deceitful, but I always do a quick web search of any players I get offered before I accept a trade.

x2

I think it's every owner's responsibility to do so. We all have the internet
& if a trade offer comes through & it looks to good to be true, well...

I find the situation you laid out to be much less offensive than those who low-ball owners as soon as the news breaks
(knowing that the Tyreek owner has seen the news & hoping they're panicking)

For example, in the same league (& same league-mate actually):
- When the Hunt to CLE news broke, he immediately offered me a late 2nd & mid 3rd for Chubb
- When the Tyreek news broke, he offered me the 1.08 & a mid 3rd

And for the record, I DID sell Tyreek but not for a late 1st and a 3rd lol

[bawilks]

Thank everyone. That’s where I stand on this type of stuff. It’s fantasy football and it’s part of the game and every owners responsibility to make sure they are informed.

One of the members in one of my leagues blasted the tyreek owner in our group chat trying to call them out for being deceitful. I was curious what the general consensus was on this type of stuff.

[abloom]

Its perfectly fine to make the trade proposals after the news breaks.

Now if there is a trade proposal on the table (as in already offered) and then a player gets injured or bad news comes out and the person immediately accepts the offer (now that the player is less valuable) I think thats not in good spirit.

[Cameron Giles]

I would not want to build a rep in a league as the guy that instantaneously sends high value offers when his players get in trouble.

[Pac_Eddy]

I think it's a little deceitful, but not against any rules.

I won't make those sorts of offers as I like to make trades that work for both parties, not trying to rip someone off. After burning a few bridges, it will be tough to make any deals that aren't lopsided against you.

[briank]

What’s everyone’s option on trading players when you get breaking news that is potentially damaging for a player?

I’ll use the recent Tyreek Hill situation. If a hill owner say got the news as soon as it broke and then tried to trade him and the other owner was not aware of what happened yet.

It's a little dirty, but I think it's fine. It's something I will shame that owner for if I catch them trying to do it to me, but I agree that it is every owners responsibility to follow the news.

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

Caveat emptor

The only exception would be if we were in verbal talks, then the trade got officially offered on the website, and in between that time, some big news happened. Then I would have no issue if the other team backed out and declined due to a changing situation.

[Goddard]

Caveat emptor

The only exception would be if we were in verbal talks, then the trade got officially offered on the website, and in between that time, some big news happened. Then I would have no issue if the other team backed out and declined due to a changing situation.

Agree. Or if you have some inside knowledge before anyone has access to it and you ship that player out before it becomes news.

[Titans95]

Knowledge is power if you ask me. This isn't the stock market with the SEC breathing down our necks, if your friend of a friend knows a friend that knows some information all the power to you.

[Goddard]

Knowledge is power if you ask me. This isn't the stock market with the SEC breathing down our necks, if your friend of a friend knows a friend that knows some information all the power to you.

Lol I guess, but still deceitful. Agree that you're not breaking any rules, but the question is whether or not it's being deceitful.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

I'd say there's a difference between potentially damaging and damaging. I don't mind ppl sending out offers to trade away hill at high value with the news that just came out. But let's say you start spamming the league with the same high value offers the minute a video comes out that shows Hill beating his kid and breaking his arm, hoping they hadn't seen it yet. That would be a bit deceitful in my book.

[Patsfan86]

Im in a league where its just my friends and my rule to them is "I will be the scummiest player ever in fantasy football, i will manipulate, lie, cheat, and steal from you if i can, and i expect the same from you. But ill be cool and trustworthy in real life." Its a game, no holds barred.