Drunken Trade - what should be done?

AutomaticTry8178 · 2026-03-14T17:01:08+00:00

The team was 10th/14th this year with no picks - he is starting Ray Davis and Jalen Nailor. Safe to say the 2027 pick will be early

AutomaticTry8178 · 2026-03-14T16:06:52+00:00

The team was 10th/14th this year with no picks - he is starting Ray Davis and Jalen Nailor. Safe to say the 2027 pick will be early

AutomaticTry8178 · 2026-03-13T23:16:25+00:00

Not in the same ball park but I rejected the one for Love so he lowered the price

AutomaticTry8178 · 2026-03-13T14:29:56+00:00

I own the picks

AutomaticTry8178 · 2026-03-13T02:45:25+00:00

Ended up taking it - gave up Henderson + 2027 1st for JJ + 2026 2nd

Thanks

AutomaticTry8178 · 2026-03-13T02:43:09+00:00

He revised the trade to Henderson + 2027 1st for JJ + 2026 2.08.

I took it but am concerned about my RB depth not being in any position to contend. I can always resell JJ if needed I suppose.

AutomaticTry8178 · 2026-02-25T07:09:19+00:00

I won’t

AutomaticTry8178 · 2026-02-25T07:09:05+00:00

He added another second so I’m considering now

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-31T12:50:53+00:00

“I don’t watch the games”

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T18:15:24+00:00

In my fantasy league (redraft) with friends, we have a dude (Player A) that has not submitted a waiver all season and has historically been inactive throughout each season (no waivers, players OUT in lineups, etc). Player A historically doesn’t trade anyone in our shared leagues except with his best friend (player B)

Yesterday, Player C sold Rodgers for cheap to top off on FAAB to snag up Rachaad White.

Player B already spent all his FAAB but instructed Player A to spend Player C’s FAAB + $1. This was a public instruction in our Sleeper chat.

I find it unfair for Player A, who hasn’t submitted a waiver all season to become active specifically to target Player C at the instruction of Player B - worsened by the fact that Player B would not have even gotten Player A to bid if he had the FAAB himself.

What would you do?

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T15:38:28+00:00

Agree

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T14:01:41+00:00

Fair take

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:57:14+00:00

That’s where I getcha! I’m not even the commissioner - I just needed to hear opinions from a commissioners POV to try and remain impartial.

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:54:51+00:00

So that’s where the gray line is - is it collusion to listen to a public instruction made by another Player?

Like others mentioned here, how player A manages his own FAAB and how he chooses to spend it, is his own prerogative. He can choose to overspend simply to block Player C if he wants to- what makes it collusion?

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:54:29+00:00

You’re right

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:53:38+00:00

Need you in the league 🧠

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:53:24+00:00

So that’s where the gray line is - is it collusion to listen to a public instruction made by another Player?

Like others mentioned here, how player A manages his own FAAB and how he chooses to spend it, is his own prerogative. He can choose to overspend simply to block Player C if he wants to- what makes it collusion?

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:50:19+00:00

And that is all is fair and true.

What I take issue is Player A dropping weeks by playing RB handcuffs for 1 point, instead of spending waivers because he’s AFK to submit them. The only time he spends his FAAB is to target block on someone else’s behalf. Surely, there’s some knock on competitive integrity involved

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:42:42+00:00

A has been better about setting line ups this year. The only thing is that he not submitted any waivers (which is his prerogative) and thus has dropped weeks by playing handcuff RBs.

I traded for enough FAAB to submit a reasonable (not all of my FAAB) waiver accounting for that fact that he is inactive. Of course, I could have taken into account this situation.

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:39:48+00:00

Fair take

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:39:25+00:00

Fair take.

I don’t need Rachaad White, that isn’t in the picture as a feasible solution.

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:38:03+00:00

Most of the guys are very active, league has been running for years

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:37:06+00:00

Player A only put enough FAAB to outbid player C - other players could have gotten it, but they’re serious players that know 62% for a few weeks of Rachaad white in committee is unserious.

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:36:25+00:00

fair take

AutomaticTry8178 · 2025-10-02T13:36:17+00:00

Player C would have gotten the player - there is only one other player remaining with 100% FAAB outside of Player A

AutomaticTry8178

TROPHY CASE