Dynasty League Football Forum

FiremanEd wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:26 pm

ThunderTung wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 2:25 pm

FiremanEd wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 2:07 pm One question I would have is whether those in favor feel that it actually drives more trades. I’d argue it doesn’t, both due to the fact that trades can undoubtedly cover the value of the conditions being added with other value of a similar risk, and due to the incremental haggling it could drive into a discussion that’s unnecessary. If I know my assets I can make an offer, accept or decline and it is final. With conditions, it’s open ended, and suddenly all sorts of other variables are added unnecessarily.

Is the concept cool? Yes, in theory it is. I just don’t know if it actually adds value to a league instead of potentially over complicating it. (My opinion of course. I acknowledge the uniqueness of it and that many would feel it is a value add, similar to the real NFL. Many non-IDP players may say the same about IDP!)

I would say that I don't think it drives the raw number of trades up, however I do think it makes more owners willing to trade. There are always owners that are skeptical when it comes to trades, with conditions those owners would be more willing to make a move

Interesting. I hadn’t considered that, so good comment. I imagine they’ll still be limited traders regardless, but an extra chance to hedge I suppose.

Yea, its not foolproof, but I've def had instances where a condition makes the trade more "safe" which is usually why those type of owners don't make a ton of moves

FiremanEd wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 2:07 pm One question I would have is whether those in favor feel that it actually drives more trades. I’d argue it doesn’t, both due to the fact that trades can undoubtedly cover the value of the conditions being added with other value of a similar risk, and due to the incremental haggling it could drive into a discussion that’s unnecessary. If I know my assets I can make an offer, accept or decline and it is final. With conditions, it’s open ended, and suddenly all sorts of other variables are added unnecessarily.

Is the concept cool? Yes, in theory it is. I just don’t know if it actually adds value to a league instead of potentially over complicating it. (My opinion of course. I acknowledge the uniqueness of it and that many would feel it is a value add, similar to the real NFL. Many non-IDP players may say the same about IDP!)

I could actually envision a scenario where it could stifle trading. If you have a bunch of draft picks that are part of conditional trades, then they can’t be traded again until the specific conditions are/aren’t met.

For example, if I traded you a conditional 3rd that would become a 2nd if X condition is met, I couldn’t trade the 2nd and you couldn’t trade the 3rd until after the specific condition is determined, unless the other owner was willing to agree to the same condition.

Agree with others- it’s fine in principle but legislating it’s was a hassle. I don’t want to do it as a commissioner and I would want a great commissioner if I was going to join a league that did it.

We also used to do pick swaps, I.E. in exchange for Derrick Henry, Team A gets Team B’s 2021 first and the right to swap firsts in 2022 or 2023 at Team B’s discretion. Then you had Team A trading their swappable picks, and Team B trading the pick that could be swapped. Just wasn’t worth the commissioner headache.

OhCruelestRanter wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 3:13 pm Agree with others- it’s fine in principle but legislating it’s was a hassle. I don’t want to do it as a commissioner and I would want a great commissioner if I was going to join a league that did it.

We also used to do pick swaps, I.E. in exchange for Derrick Henry, Team A gets Team B’s 2021 first and the right to swap firsts in 2022 or 2023 at Team B’s discretion. Then you had Team A trading their swappable picks, and Team B trading the pick that could be swapped. Just wasn’t worth the commissioner headache.

If someone in my league tried to have something similar to that, I would veto it immediately and inform both trade partners that they have to be more specific. There is no swapping picks "at discretion." Conditions have to be defined.

jgoodie24 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 6:45 pm

OhCruelestRanter wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 3:13 pm Agree with others- it’s fine in principle but legislating it’s was a hassle. I don’t want to do it as a commissioner and I would want a great commissioner if I was going to join a league that did it.

We also used to do pick swaps, I.E. in exchange for Derrick Henry, Team A gets Team B’s 2021 first and the right to swap firsts in 2022 or 2023 at Team B’s discretion. Then you had Team A trading their swappable picks, and Team B trading the pick that could be swapped. Just wasn’t worth the commissioner headache.

If someone in my league tried to have something similar to that, I would veto it immediately and inform both trade partners that they have to be more specific. There is no swapping picks "at discretion." Conditions have to be defined.

I mean it was clearly defined- Team B gets to pick by a certain date before the draft whether or not they are going to swap the picks. If they do it the first time, can’t do it the second.

In any case, ambiguity was never the issue, it was just too much work for something that didn’t improve the league. Did allow me to move up from Patterson to Bell, IIRC though.

OhCruelestRanter wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 7:43 pm

jgoodie24 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 6:45 pm

OhCruelestRanter wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 3:13 pm Agree with others- it’s fine in principle but legislating it’s was a hassle. I don’t want to do it as a commissioner and I would want a great commissioner if I was going to join a league that did it.

We also used to do pick swaps, I.E. in exchange for Derrick Henry, Team A gets Team B’s 2021 first and the right to swap firsts in 2022 or 2023 at Team B’s discretion. Then you had Team A trading their swappable picks, and Team B trading the pick that could be swapped. Just wasn’t worth the commissioner headache.

If someone in my league tried to have something similar to that, I would veto it immediately and inform both trade partners that they have to be more specific. There is no swapping picks "at discretion." Conditions have to be defined.

I mean it was clearly defined- Team B gets to pick by a certain date before the draft whether or not they are going to swap the picks. If they do it the first time, can’t do it the second.

In any case, ambiguity was never the issue, it was just too much work for something that didn’t improve the league. Did allow me to move up from Patterson to Bell, IIRC though.

I totally get that. If it's not for your league, then it just isn't. However, I would argue that if a league is going to do conditionals, ambiguity makes it tough on everyone involved. For anyone who might be reading this and deciding if they want conditionals and how to go about it, I would ask the following:

Is Team B ever going to choose to move down in the draft with this discretionary choice? What happens if team B has the earlier pick for both 2022 and 2023?

I would require the language to have clear-cut if/then statements. As an example: "If, as a result of the 2021 final standings, Team A would have an earlier natural pick than Team B in the 2022 draft, the teams will swap their natural first round picks. If this condition is not met for the 2022 draft, then these same conditions will be deferred by 1 year to the 2023 draft. If the conditions are still unmet, picks will not be swapped."

jgoodie24 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 8:53 pm

OhCruelestRanter wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 7:43 pm

jgoodie24 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 6:45 pm

If someone in my league tried to have something similar to that, I would veto it immediately and inform both trade partners that they have to be more specific. There is no swapping picks "at discretion." Conditions have to be defined.

I mean it was clearly defined- Team B gets to pick by a certain date before the draft whether or not they are going to swap the picks. If they do it the first time, can’t do it the second.

In any case, ambiguity was never the issue, it was just too much work for something that didn’t improve the league. Did allow me to move up from Patterson to Bell, IIRC though.

I totally get that. If it's not for your league, then it just isn't. However, I would argue that if a league is going to do conditionals, ambiguity makes it tough on everyone involved. For anyone who might be reading this and deciding if they want conditionals and how to go about it, I would ask the following:

Is Team B ever going to choose to move down in the draft with this discretionary choice? What happens if team B has the earlier pick for both 2022 and 2023?

I would require the language to have clear-cut if/then statements. As an example: "If, as a result of the 2021 final standings, Team A would have an earlier natural pick than Team B in the 2022 draft, the teams will swap their natural first round picks. If this condition is not met for the 2022 draft, then these same conditions will be deferred by 1 year to the 2023 draft. If the conditions are still unmet, picks will not be swapped."

Yeah- our verbiage was appropriately specific. It was 8ish years ago though so I don’t remember.

All dynasty/FF rules should be unimpeachably specific and clear.

FiremanEd wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 2:07 pm One question I would have is whether those in favor feel that it actually drives more trades. I’d argue it doesn’t, both due to the fact that trades can undoubtedly cover the value of the conditions being added with other value of a similar risk, and due to the incremental haggling it could drive into a discussion that’s unnecessary. If I know my assets I can make an offer, accept or decline and it is final. With conditions, it’s open ended, and suddenly all sorts of other variables are added unnecessarily.

Is the concept cool? Yes, in theory it is. I just don’t know if it actually adds value to a league instead of potentially over complicating it. (My opinion of course. I acknowledge the uniqueness of it and that many would feel it is a value add, similar to the real NFL. Many non-IDP players may say the same about IDP!)

Yeah like I said earlier it kind of naturally implemented itself in a league I commission where we had 2-3 years go by with only 2-3 trades per year. People "wanted" to trade, but the majority were so risk averse very few ever happened. It got to the point where people moved even further from trading because they started feeling negotiating for hours/days was a waste of time because it never got anywhere. Even with conditional trades we still don't have more than 6-7 a year, which is partially why it works as well; there just isn't that much to keep track of. We've rarely ever had ones that were that complicated and as commissioner I don't mind putting in the extra time/effort to have a more active league. I can see it wouldn't be for everyone, and if you're a league that already trades a lot and people are more comfortable taking bigger risks, it could be more hassle then it's worth for sure. It just works for us and our situation.

Does anyone have sample bylaws covering conditional pick trading they can share?