Loaning/renting players... do any of you allow it?

[Life of Pablo]

This is best explained with the example that came to me today. I sent out an offer for Zeke to the last-place team (like a 2% chance of making the playoffs at this point). He did not acknowledge the specific offer I made, but instead came back with: "I'll give you Zeke for the rest of the year for your 2019 1st." AKA I would have to give Zeke back to him once the season's over.

From his side, I get it. Loan out a valuable player (who's unable to help you this year) so you can benefit for next year/beyond. And even from my side, I get it. Pay a "reduced" cost to boost my championship chances for 1 year only. A great advantage from both sides that should be used... if it's allowed.

But this is too much gaming the system, right? I'll likely decline the offer (even if I wanted to accept it, I'd ask the commish/the rest of the league beforehand if something like that is acceptable), but I have to admit it's a tempting offer. And technically legal? It's not exactly collusion, but it's still in a morally gray area. Ultimately I still think it's too much of an abuse on the spirit/integrity of trading... all trades should be seen as permanent 1-stage deals, not temporary x-stage deals.

Regardless, does anyone care to chime in with their thoughts? I assume almost everyone in here would say this should not be allowed... but any leagues out there that allow this/any of you guys out there that would be ok with this?

[Jigga94]

That's collusion

[Jigga94]

That's collusion

[jman3134]

That's collusion

X2

[Pac_Eddy]

This thread is going to blow up... Definitely collusion.

[thebeast]

I don’t think it’s collusion as both teams are making a deal that benefits both teams and the deal is public. However it’s totally wrong, leagues would fall apart quickly if deals like this were allowed.

Thinking about it more though, the collusion would be the part where you would need to just send Zeke back.

[jman3134]

That's collusion

You can say that again.....

[jeffster]

I don't think it's collusion.

But unless the rules allow explicitly allow for conditional trades, then only trades that the system supports should happen. If this guy wants to trade Zeke to you, and then you decide on your own to trade him back for something at the end of the season, then fine. But there's nothing that can be a part of it that isn't actually in the trade itself, e.g.a promise to do something in the future.

It has to be this way. Otherwise how would anything be enforced? What if you guys do this and you don't send Zeke back, then what does the commish do?

But collusion to me means deliberate cheating. Not adding extraneous elements into a trade.

[bjd5211]

It's an interesting concept, one that I have thought about before, the issue I always run into is how to set it up so it doesn't create a superteam. If you loan out all your good players every year not only are you collecting picks for them and then getting your player back, you are also pretty much guaranteeing yourself the #1 pick because all of your best players are on another team. Eventually you have all of your players that you drafted PLUS own the majority of the picks in a given year.

I just don't see how it can be allowed without creating significant competitive balance issues in the league and would have to say these types of trades would need to be banned.

[jman3134]

I don't think it's collusion.

But unless the rules allow explicitly allow for conditional trades, then only trades that the system supports should happen. If this guy wants to trade Zeke to you, and then you decide on your own to trade him back for something at the end of the season, then fine. But there's nothing that can be a part of it that isn't actually in the trade itself, e.g.a promise to do something in the future.

It has to be this way. Otherwise how would anything be enforced? What if you guys do this and you don't send Zeke back, then what does the commish do?

But collusion to me means deliberate cheating. Not adding extraneous elements into a trade.

This is deliberate cheating. To be clear, you should be able to trade a player then ask for him back. For it to not be collusion, it is likely you paid more for him than you did initially or relatively less if his value declines dramatically. Ultimately, a trade back is difficult to prove as collusion.

With that said, he is specifically providing the services of a player for you to use against half the league (as half the season is over). So you using Zeke for half the season is disproportionately impacting one half of the schedule. Either this guy is out of contention or is confident enough that he can win without Zeke and perhaps get a better seed (say he is playing bottom dwellers the rest of the season) if you had him. So in all scenarios, each owner is acting in their own self interest, but pooling their respective players to collectively beat the rest of the league.

This isn't what is happening but is the logical end: lets say someone paid you a 2019 1st to switch teams with them for the 2nd half of the schedule. Would this be fair? This situation is a shade of grey on the above scenario.

[BigBawseRoss]

no no that is the exact definition of collusion lol

[Wile E. Coyote]

.
I have heard of loaning/renting players, but never seen it.

I agree with others, that would be collusion.
.

[XclickX]

I’ve pulled off a trade like this in redraft. So it’s a little different but it was a few years ago and I moved T.Y. Hilton for McKinnon ( when AP was out for the season.). Standard scoring league and I had bye week woes and needed an rb for 2 weeks. He needed a WR for 2 weeks to cover byes. We agreed to make the exact same trade after the 2 week rental.
Well TY blew up and it was extremely difficult to get the other owner to trade me back Hilton . Eventually he kept his word but it was like pulling teeth. We told the commish it was a two week trade and the league did not care since it was improving both teams. Not sure your trade is the same but if I were you and wanted to do it without involving your commish or league this is what you do.

Zeke for a legitimate haul. Your whole 2019 draft 1,2,3 and your 2020 1,2,3 plus maybe someone like a Guice on your IR or Hunter Henry , McKinnon , etc. Then after the season you trade Zeke back to him for your 2019 1,3 and 2020 1,2,3 plus your IR player back. So basically the guy gains a late second rd pick for his troubles. Nobody will think twice if you guys did it like this. And if they did say something there is nothing they can do since the trade in the first place was fair, 6 picks and a player for Zeke( or whatever you 2 agree is fair).

What you are trying to do will never work. After the season how will the league allow you to trade Zeke for nothing back? Imo it has to be a fair deal for Zeke this year then a fair deal in the offseason to give him back but you get back a tiny bit less.

[jenkins.math]

Piling on. Collusion.

[AussieMate]

This is not collusion, I've seen this in other fantasy sports like EPL and it can be a legitimate system. I personally don't like it and would need some defined rules in the bylaws around it to even consider it in my league, I agree you shouldn't do it and will receive plenty of backlash from your league.