Archive
Passing Judgment – Webb Gem
News broke today that former Cy Young Award winner Brandon Webb has reached an agreement with the American League champion Texas Rangers. This is a great move by Texas as they look to reconstruct their starting rotation after the departure of Cliff Lee to the Phillies. Webb, the 2006 Cy Young Award winner and runner-up in both 2007 and 2008, is coming back from a major shoulder surgery that cost him just about the entire last two seasons. Shoulder injuries are not easy for pitchers to come back from. Many expected Webb to at least be back in the major leagues sometime around the All-Star break in 2010, but he never could get it going and eventually shut it down for the whole season. So it has been over two years since baseball has seen what Brandon Webb can do, and those memories should be vividly clear.
Obviously there is an inherent risk in relying on Webb to be his old self, especially right away. I don’t think Nolan Ryan or anyone in the Rangers’ organization has those expectations. But assuming Webb feels good and regains his strength, mechanics and confidence, the Rangers may have found a true diamond in the rough. When Webb was healthy and at the top of his game, he was almost unhittable at times with a devastating curveball to go along with his deceivingly quick fastball. He also became a top pitcher by learning how to pitch. In his second full season in the big leagues in 2004, Webb led all of baseball with 119 walks to go along with his 7-16 record. However, his ERA that season was 3.59 which truly demonstrated how talented he was. Over the next several years, he really put it all together and became one of the elite pitchers in the game with consistency, control and durability. From 2006-2008, he compiled a record of 56-25 with a 3.20 ERA. These years included his Cy Young Award and back-to-back 2nd place finishes. More impressively, he averaged 185 strikeouts and only 65 walks per season while pitching 230+ innings. Unfortunately, his shoulder gave out on him on Opening Day in 2009 and he hasn’t pitched to a big league hitter since.
Clearly Webb has an impressive resume and mental make-up. The Rangers were in desperate need of adding to their rotation after Cliff Lee left and they missed out on acquiring Zack Greinke. Now Webb, who will turn 32 during the 2011 season, can attempt his comeback in a winning environment where he can become a savior and a hero. He will also help lead a relatively young rotation of C.J. Wilson, Colby Lewis and Derek Holland. And worst case scenario is that Webb either doesn’t return to his old form or he continues to suffer from the injury. In that case, the Rangers would have only invested a few million dollars into a one-year contract. This is clearly a low risk – high reward scenario for Texas. Any time you can add a former Cy Young Award winner who is still relatively young to your staff is an opportunity and chance worth taking. I would not be surprised to see Webb bounce back and have a solid year thanks to Nolan Ryan’s influence.
In summation, kudos to the Rangers for making this transaction. This could be a win-win for everyone involved, and at the very least, it did not come at a steep price.
Cliff’s Notes – My Thoughts on the Cliff Lee Signing
I recently wrote an article arguing that Cliff Lee is overrated when comparing his overall body of work to the contracts he was being offered in terms of length and cost. I did not include the Philadelphia Phillies in that article because at the time, there was no indication that they were even a consideration for Lee since no reports surfaced of any contract negotiations. Now that the Phillies have come in and swept Lee away from the New York Yankees and Texas Rangers, I must swallow some pride and admit a couple things. First off, I still believe that Cliff Lee is overrated and that the Phillies will being grossly overpaying after three years. Second, I must give credit to the Phillies for being aggressive and pursuing Lee to include him in arguably one of the greatest starting pitching rotations of all-time. Lee will be the #2 man behind 2010 Cy Young Award winner Roy Halladay, and in front of Roy Oswalt and Cole Hamels. In many respects, when Lee is at the top of his game he is the left-handed version of Halladay. Opponents surely are not looking forward to facing the Phillies. The Phillies, who just saw their best right-handed hitter and starting RF Jayson Werth bolt to Washington, did not stand still. They probably realized that there was not a better option to plug in to right field, so they have essentially changed their overall philosophy. They are not going to bludgeon teams with their offense anymore, which still contains Chase Utley and Ryan Howard. Instead, they have gone the other direction to dominate the league with pitching. So I applaud Ruben Amaro and the rest of the Phillies’ organization for being so flexible and creative. And yes, it pains me as a Mets’ fan to say that.
Most importantly, I must give credit to Cliff Lee. In current times, professional athletes seek the most amount of money they possibly can – which they are entitled to do so. Most times, the pursuit of the most money leads players to teams and organizations where there is little chance of succeeding as a team (See Jayson Werth article at http://fantasyjudgment.wordpress.com/2010/12/06/nationals-will-not-get-their-moneys-werth/). Here, Cliff Lee left several million dollars on the table from both the Yankees and Rangers’ contract offers. Granted, he had very good chances of winning had he signed with New York or Texas, but he realized the situation he would be in if he signed with the Phillies and joined their starting rotation. He also clearly enjoyed his time in Philadelphia after being traded there in 2009 and helping lead the Phillies to the World Series. Kudos to Lee for deciding to play on a team that he enjoyed being a part of and that gives him an excellent chance of winning a championship. No one can ever say he went for the money. And maybe he is overpriced and not deserving of more years and dollars than Roy Halladay. But he will certainly be worth more to the Phillies than Jayson Werth was to them or will be to the Nationals.
“Off the Cliff” – Is Cliff Lee Overrated?
This may sound sacrilegious, but is Cliff Lee really worth the years and money that are being offered in negotiations? There is no dispute that he is the top free agent available and is arguably one of the best pitchers in baseball – right now. But the notion that he deserves a 6 or 7-year contract at a salary equal to or greater than some of the game’s best pitchers is questionable. I haven’t seen anyone else make this argument regarding Cliff Lee. All I read in the papers, blogs, websites, Twitter and Facebook is how multiple teams are justifiably making insane contract offers to a 32-year old pitcher with a history of back injuries and one amazing season on his resume. Yes, adding Cliff Lee to any team would make them instantly better. The Yankees, Rangers, Angels, Nationals and every other team in Major League Baseball would love to have Cliff Lee in their starting rotation. But at what cost? It is clear that the economic prosperity of Major League Baseball and some of its teams, as well as the market value of free agents, is dictating the terms of contracts being offered. That is fine, but my criticism is the gross over-evaluation of the most elite free agent pitcher on the market this year.
I realize that a baseball player’s value and success has many intangible aspects to consider. That is why Derek Jeter just signed a 3 year/$51M contract as a 36-year old shortstop entering the final stages of his career. Jeter has intrinsic value as an iconic New York Yankee, and he has 15 years of being one of the league’s most clutch performers in the biggest of spotlights. But what can the Yankees realistically expect from an aging Jeter who has lost a step or two and isn’t getting any younger? His statistics and actual on-field performance does not equate to the contract he received. The years and numbers being offered to Cliff Lee elicit the same questions.
Over his 8-year career, Lee is 102-61 with a 3.85 ERA. He has had a very interesting career with many ups and downs. After being acquired by the Indians in the infamous Bartolo Colon trade with Omar Minaya and the Montreal Expos (the trade that sent Colon to Montreal for Lee, Grady Sizemore, and Brandon Phillips), he had a couple cups of coffee with Cleveland in 2002 and 2003. He found some success between 2004-2006 by going 46-24 including an 18-win season in 2005. But if you look deeper at his numbers, his ERA’s ranged between 3.79 and 5.43 during that time. He also did not possess the same walk/strikeout ratio that we have grown accustomed to more recently. During a dismal 2007 season, he was demoted to the minors to work on his mechanics and find himself. He certainly did because his 2008 Cy Young season was one of the best statistical performances in recent history. He went 22-3 with a 2.54 ERA, and in 223 innings he only walked 34 batters. This dominant control would become Lee’s signature attribute. He only walked 43 batters in 231 innings in 2009, and more amazingly, he only walked 18 batters in 212 innings in 2010. That’s right, only 18 walks in the entire 2010 season split between Seattle and Texas. However, his overall record the past two years was a collective 26-22 with a 3.20 ERA.
There were some mitigating factors for his mediocre win/loss record since 2009. He was traded in the middle of each season, including switching to the unfamiliar National League in 2009. After he was traded to Seattle before the 2010 season, he was recovering from an injury and missed the beginning of the season. The Mariners were also one of the worst offensive teams in baseball, so run support was not there for him. Surprisngly, after he was traded to the Texas Rangers, who possessed a far superior offense and bullpen, Lee’s performance took a nose-dive down the stretch. He compiled a 4-6 record with a 3.98 ERA in his 15 starts with the Rangers. There were rumblings about his previous back injuries flaring up, and it seemed to make sense given his inconsistent pitching. However, once the calendar turned to October, Lee became a different pitcher.
Cliff Lee has pitched in the past two post-seasons with the Phillies and the Rangers. In 2009, he went 4-0 including two wins against the Yankees in the World Series. He didn’t just win these games – he dominated them. He carried this success over to the 2010 playoffs where he went 3-0 in the first two rounds of the playoffs, including another dominant performance against the Yankees in the ALCS. Through his first seven post-season games, he was 7-0 with a sub-2.00 ERA. However, the 2010 World Series would not see Lee achieve the same success as he lost twice to the eventual champion San Francisco Giants. He didn’t just lose, he got knocked around and looked like anything but a dominant ace pitcher. And that is the lasting memory we have of the 2010 season.
So here we are during the off-season and Lee is getting offers of 6-7 years at $150M. Yes, he is a good pitcher with some terrific success in the post-season prior to the World Series. But if you break down his numbers and consider where he is in his career, he has likely maxed out by now. At 32, he is almost beyond his prime and is coming off two very mediocre seasons. His 2008 season is one for the record books and is unlikely to be repeated, especially by someone without the history of consistency. Other pitchers who have received similar contracts, such as Roy Halladay, Johan Santana and C.C. Sabathia, all had resumes consisting of multiple years of domination and consistency. They are all generally around the same age and they all have likely reached their pinnacle of success in terms of statistical performance. Here comes Cliff Lee seemingly out of nowhere since 2008 now commanding the same type of contract that these other stud pitchers have. It is likely that if Lee signs with the Yankees, Rangers or Angels he will have success because these are all very good teams. At 32, he likely does have a few more years left where those lofty expectations can be met. But as we all know in the post-steroid era, baseball players typically do not get better once they reach their mid-30′s. Especially a starting pitcher with a history of back injuries. No one can fault Lee for seeking a contract of 7 years, especially when there are multiple teams willing to give it to him. But the sensible thing for all teams involved would have been offering a 3 or 4 year contract to maximize their rate of return. Even if Lee is successful and helps put a team over the top, what will this contract look like when he is 37, 38 or 39 years old and a shell of his former self? Maybe these teams have so much financial security that they don’t even care. So why should we care?
We should care because as profitable as baseball is right now, there is no guarantee that things will remain the way they are. Teams are generating more revenue and income than ever, thanks in part to television networks and overall interest and attendance at games. But money does not grow on trees, so a team that makes a financial commitment like this had better be prepared to suffer through a devaluation at the end of the contract. In 2016, whoever signs Lee and is paying him $23M will likely not be receiving their money’s worth for his performance. That is just human nature. But this contract could become an albatross and prevent the team from making other moves that it needs to. Basically, signing Cliff Lee to such a contract is for a short-term goal with long-term repercussions. But again I ask, is he really worth it? His playoff performances the last two years seem to have masked the reality that Cliff Lee has had a very pedestrian career outside of his ridiculous 2008 season. He is not likely going to get better, and he must accept the pressure and responsibility of being in the spotlight as one of the highest paid athletes in all of professional sports. He is a simple man from Arkansas. He is not flashy, he does not get in trouble, and he seems to enjoy his lifestyle living in relative obscurity. This will all change once he signs on a dotted line for the projected years and dollars that have been offered.
In summation, I am not saying that Cliff Lee isn’t a good pitcher or that teams wouldn’t be better with him on their pitching staff. What I am saying is that he is being treated like an all-time great and someone who can be counted on for numbers that correlate to the dollars he is about to earn. His overall resume does not demonstrate that. He will help whomever he chooses to sign with, but what will that sentiment be a few years down the road?
Comments? Thoughts? Questions?
(E) michael.stein@fantasyjudgment.com
(T) @FantasyJudgment
Nationals Will Not Get Their Money’s “Werth”
Let me premise this article by first stating that people are entitled to seek as much money as they possibly can from an employer to do their job. Additionally, people are entitled to make decisions that most benefit themselves and their families. Finally, owners of a business are entitled to spend their own money however they desire in an effort to improve their business and make more money. That all being said, the 7-year/$126 million contract that Jayson Werth signed with the Washington Nationals is an absolute joke and an embarassment to Major League Baseball.
Not only did the Nationals overpay and outbid everyone else for the services of an aging, injury-prone corner outfielder who clearly benefited from hitting in a loaded lineup and bandbox ballpark, but they also set the market for other eligible free agents with unrealistic demands and expectations. Let me first say that I have always liked Jayson Werth as a ballplayer. I thought he was going to be a superstar when he came up through the Dodgers farm system. But various injuries derailed his progress and he never had the chance to showcase his talents for a full season in Los Angeles. Eventually the Dodgers got tired of waiting for him to develop and stay healthy, so the Phillies intelligently picked him up and gave him an opportunity just as their renaissance began in 2007. Werth plays the game of baseball with reckless abandon at times, and has proven to be a clutch performer in the playoffs. He is gritty, gutty, and likes to get his jersey dirty. He fit perfectly in the Phillies’ lineup batting behind the powerful and prolific left-handed bats of Chase Utley and Ryan Howard. Werth was the reason why opposing teams had to make pitching changes as he provided the right-handed pop in the middle of their batting order. And he did produce. From 2008-2010 when Werth was playing everyday and staying healthy, he averaged 29 HR’s, 84 RBI’s, and a .279 batting average. These were good numbers for a player that was arguably the 3rd best player in the Phillies’ lineup.
Werth was clearly not the focus of the Phillies’ offensive firepower. But he developed a nice niche in Philadelphia as their rabid fan base quickly grew to embrace his style of play. Plus, he was playing on a team that made back-back World Series appearances, including one championship, and four consecutive NL East division titles. He was on a team with a pitching staff comprised of Roy Halladay, Roy Oswalt, and Cole Hamels – a staff that will keep the Phillies in contention every year as long as they stay healthy. He was part of a team that could almost be considered a dynasty given their recent and projected success. Generally speaking, Jayson Werth was a significant piece of a larger puzzle.
Now he has signed a contract with the Washington Nationals. The Nationals, whose legacy stems from the Montreal Expos, do not have a rich history of success. They have been unable to lure free agents to their team for a variety of reasons. Knowing that, the Nationals offered Werth more years and more dollars than any other team would ever have offered. In doing so, they got their man. But what did they get? Werth will be 32 during the 2011 season, and his contract will expire when he is 39 years old. This is a player with a significant history of injuries. Granted he has been healthy for the last 2 and a half seasons, but as we all know in this post-steroid era, players generally do not get better with age as they approach their mid-30′s. The Nationals are also expecting him to be the focus of their offensive attack in addition to Ryan Zimmerman. There is no other legitimate threat on the Nationals’ roster as we speak, so Werth is likely to be exposed on an island in comparison to his role on the Phillies. Furthermore, Nationals Ballpark is not considered a hitter’s haven like Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia. Werth does have undeniable power, but those lazy fly balls that reached the seats in Philly will turn into F8′s in DC. Werth has been brought in to replace Adam Dunn, who recently signed a free agent contract with the Chicago White Sox. He will never be able to replicate Dunn’s power, although he will be expected to – especially since he signed for more than twice of what Dunn got from Chicago.
The last point I want to make in all of this is something that is probably unfair to be commenting on, but as a fan, I feel obligated to do so. Sure, I understand that playing baseball is a job. Jayson Werth goes to work everyday, just like I do. Except, he gets to go play baseball at a ballpark whereas I have to drive, take two trains, walk across Manhattan and go into an office building. An ancillary part of Jayson Werth’s job, as well as every other professional athlete, is an innate desire to win. Not just personal success, but team success. Players will make their money, but receiving a championship ring or trophy is a true sense of professional accomplishment for a player. Werth attained this success in 2008 with the Phillies. He almost tasted it again in 2009 when the Phillies lost to the Yankees. Given the team that the Phillies still have, it was very likely he would have a chance to taste it again and again. However, deciding to sign with the Nationals almost assures him that he will not ever taste this type of victory again. Look, I am not saying the Washington Nationals can never be successful. Of course they can – with some creative moves, money spent wisely, and development of young players, the Nationals certainly can become a contender in the NL East. But the chance of this happening during the remainder of Werth’s productive years is slim. In other words, there are reasons why no other big name free agents have ever signed with the Nationals until now. Werth probably could have gotten his $17-18M per year from the Phillies, but not for as many years. The Nationals had to commit to those years to lure him, and lure him they did. How productive do you think Werth will be at 38 years old making $18M? If he is in his prime right now and average 29 HR’s and 84 RBI in a great lineup, what kind of numbers will be average in the next 7 years as he ages and hits in a weak lineup and cavernous ballpark? My guess is he will be earning approximately $1,000,000 per homerun he hits.
At the end of the day, good for Jayson Werth for earning this contract. Who would ever turn down an offer like this if one was given to you? No one. Werth has his championship ring already. Now he can set himself up for life and provide for his family in ways he never could have imagined a few years ago. And who knows, maybe Werth and the Nationals will have the last laugh. Come 2012, Stephen Strasburg will be back, Bryce Harper will likely be in the big leagues, and they may have acquired a few more key pieces. Maybe by then the Phillies will have aged too much and the Nationals could be knocking on their doorsteps. But even if all of that happens, this ground-breaking contract will still not be “Werth” what they are paying.
Let me know what you think. Email me at michael.stein@fantasyjudgment.com, find me on Twitter @FantasyJudgment, or leave a comment below.
Fantasy Judgment decision – December 1, 2010 (Rules are Rules)
THE SUPREME COURT OF FANTASY JUDGMENT
The Landry’s, et al. v. George, et al.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM
THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN
Decided December 1, 2010
Cite as 2 F.J. 51 (December 2010)
Factual Background
A fantasy football league called the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (hereinafter referred to as “LOEG”) is comprised of ten (10) teams who compete against each other on a weekly basis during the National Football League (“NFL”) season using the statistics of professional players as a basis for accumulating points in head-to-head competition with opponents to determine which fantasy team won or lost. The LOEG is hosted on the CBSSports fantasy football platform. The league rules regarding the process and eligibility of making add/drops are delineated in the LOEG Constitution under Section 4 entitled “ADD/DROPS.” The following is the language of the pertinent rule within the LOEG Constitution:
4.1 Free agent pickups and add/drops are unlimited and first-come, first-served from the conclusion of the initial waiver process (immediately after the draft) until kickoff of the first game of the season. After kickoff of the first game, player adds and drops will be done through a waiver process. The initial waiver order will be the reverse of the initial draft order. Once an owner acquires a player from waivers, that owner goes to the bottom of the waiver order. Each week, the waivers process starts the day after the last game of the previous week (typically this is the Tuesday after Monday Night Football). All available players (including dropped players) remain on waivers for at least one day (typically this day is the Tuesday after MNF) to ensure everyone has an opportunity to see and claim a player they might have interest in acquiring. The waivers process then is executed after the one day review period (typically on Wednesday morning at about 2:00 AM). Players who have gone through the waivers process are considered Free Agents. Free Agent pickups are unlimited and first-come, first-served starting immediately after the waiver wire is processed. Claiming a Free Agent does not change the waiver wire order. Players who are dropped as part of the waiver process then go on waivers for one day, and so on. Adds/Drops will be allowed throughout the playoffs until the final playoff game is started. Once a team is eliminated from the playoffs, that team may not add or drop any players for the remainder of the season. Any timed adds / drops that appear to be collusion between teams are subject to review and potential reversal by the commissioner.
Last week, The Landry’s, who were already mathematically eliminated from playoff contention, successfully added Brian Westbrook (RB-SF) onto his roster due to his favorable position on the waiver order. Concurrently, both the Jetnuts and George put in claims for Westbrook and were notified that they were denied their request due to Westbrook being acquired by The Landry’s.
George challenged The Landry’s acquisition of Westbrook to the LOEG Commissioner. The Commissioner subsequently ruled that Westbrook would be removed from The Landry’s roster and awarded to the Jetnuts who had a higher waiver position than George (and both teams were still mathematically alive for a playoff berth).
Two weeks ago, Evil Empire (the team for the owner who also happens to be the league Commissioner) acquired Shaun Hill (QB-DET) when he was already eliminated from playoff contention. Hill was not used in Evil Empire’s starting lineup and had no bearing on the result of the game between Evil Empire and The Landry’s, which was ultimately won by Evil Empire. Due to the Commissioner’s ruling on the Brian Westbrook issue, The Landry’s now protest their game against Evil Empire where they allege Evil Empire’s lineup was illegal due to his improper acquisition of Shaun Hill. The rules for challenging or protesting the scoring and results of games within the league are delineated under Section 3 entitled “REGULAR SEASON.” The following is the language of the pertinent rule in the LOEG Constitution:
3.7 Any scoring challenges may be made only until noon on the Wednesday following the game in question.
The Commissioner provided the following response to The Landry’s protest and request for reversal of their prior matchup:
“It’s true that there is a rule prohibiting teams out of playoff contention from performing add/drops. I picked up Shaun Hill as a bench player quarterback on Wednesday November 25th, not realizing that we had that rule in our bylaws. If they want me to drop Shaun Hill, I can do that. Since the move did not affect the outcome of a game, nor was it protested prior to the weekend games, I see no reason to issue my team a loss for this infraction.”
Both The Landry’s and Iceman have made arguments before the Court in opposition to Rule 4.1, specifically the provision that prohibits teams eliminated from playoff contention from making add/drops. The Landry’s argue that teams should be able to still compete for individual records and milestones, including highest point totals and largest margins of victory in the season. Iceman argues that the concept of playing spoiler applies in fantasy sports as well where a team eliminated from playoff contention can still “play its Super Bowl” against a team still competing for the playoffs and have an effect on their ultimate outcome.
Procedural History
There are multiple claims made involving several LOEG teams. The following represents a breakdown of the existing claims in this complaint:
- George challenges The Landry’s acquisition of Brian Westbrook due to the fact that The Landry’s have been eliminated from playoff contention.
- The Landry’s challenge the application of Rule 4.1 where his acquisition of Brian Westbrook was revoked due to the fact he was eliminated from playoff contention.
- George challenges the Commissioner’s decision to award Westbrook to the Jetnuts due to the Jetnuts having a more favorable position in the waiver order.
- The Landry’s protest their previous game against Evil Empire because Empire had improperly added Shaun Hill to his roster when technically he should not have been able to do so because he was already eliminated from playoff contention.
The Commissioner agreed with George’s challenge that Westbrook should not have been acquired by the The Landry’s and ruled that he belonged on the Jetnuts due to their more favorable waiver wire position. The Commissioner also rejected The Landry’s request for a reversal of their previous game due to Shaun Hill being illegally placed on Evil Empire’s lineup.
Issues Presented
(1) Was the LOEG Commissioner’s application of Rule 4.1 correct and appropriate?
(2) Should there be any exceptions to Rule 4.1 which would allow teams eliminated from playoff contention to acquire players via add/drop?
(3) Should The Landry’s request for reversal of the results of his game against Evil Empire be granted?
Decision
The Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment is a strong advocate for having written Constitutions that govern fantasy sports leagues. There are a myriad of reasons why the Court believes having a Constitution in place is the best way to run and maintain a fantasy league. One of the primary reasons behind this rationale is that all league members are aware of the rules and guidelines in place that govern the administration and function of the fantasy league. When a league Commissioner writes out the rules and distributes them to the league, it shifts the burden onto the league members to read, understand, and adhere to the rules that are delineated. If a league member has an issue, question or challenge to one of the rules in the Constitution, they are welcome to raise this with the Commissioner before signing it or agreeing to its codification.
Here, the LOEG Constitution clearly states the rule regarding the process and eligibility for acquiring players through the add/drop waiver wire. Within the confines of Rule 4.1, teams that are eliminated from playoff contention are not allowed to acquire players through the add/drop process. Not only does the Constitution explicitly state this, but the legislative intent and purpose behind the rule is logical, reasonable, and promotes the maintenance of the league’s integrity by preventing potential collusion. It is conceivable for a team with no chance of securing a playoff berth to sell off or trade his best players to a contending team with which he tries to strike a deal for a sharing of the monetary prize. This rule specifically prevents that from happening by not even letting the teams susceptible to such temptation make roster moves.
The Commissioner made the correct decision to remove Brian Westbrook from The Landry’s roster after he was notified about the transaction. Once The Landry’s officially was eliminated from playoff contention, they were not permitted to make any more add/drops as per the language contained in Rule 4.1 of the LOEG Constitution. The Court surmises that there is no such capability on CBSSports.com to include a setting or rule that would prevent eliminated teams from making transactions. If there is such capability, the Commissioner should certainly utilize it. If there is not, then it is up to the Commissioner and all other teams to be diligent and police such activity – as was done here.
Once the Commissioner realized that Westbrook needed to be removed from The Landry’s roster, he had to determine which eligible team had the rights to acquire him. George notified the Commissioner that his waiver request was denied in favor of The Landry’s, but he was not the only one. According to the testimony of the Commissioner, the Jetnuts had also made a claim for Westbrook and possessed a more favorable waiver wire position that George. As a result, the Commissioner correctly awarded Westbrook to the Jetnuts based on their higher position in the waiver order. Had Westbrook not been added by The Landry’s, he would have correctly gone to the Jetnuts anyway based on the waiver order.
The Court has received arguments and testimony from both The Landry’s and Iceman concerning the applicability of Rule 4.1. The Landry’s argues that teams eliminated from playoff contention are still competing and have individual goals they are striving for – as a result, they should be allowed to add players and continue to try and better their team. Iceman argues that teams eliminated from playoff contention will get a chance to play spoiler, which becomes the equivalent of their Super Bowl because it would mean something to them to have a tangible effect on the overall playoff picture. These points are well-received and the Court appreciates their dedication and attitude. However, Rule 4.1 clearly denies eliminated teams the ability to add players. This rule and the entire LOEG Constitution have been in existence and made available to the entire league since before the season began. This issue should have been addressed or raised at the time the rules and Constitution were first made available to the league. While The Landry’s and Iceman make valid arguments, they should be made during the upcoming off-season when the rules can/should be changed. There is no valid reason to change the rules during the middle of the season outside of extreme and unforeseeable consequences. See John Doe v. Fantasy Football League Commissioner, 2 F.J. 21, 22 (October 2010). The Court would only support changing or adding to the rules in mid-season if it is the only option to prevent a complete mutiny or meltdown of a fantasy league. This does not appear to be the case. Part of the Commissioner’s responsibilities include recognizing when the time is right for an intervention of his power and authority. See George v. LOEG Commissioner, 2 F.J. 42, 43 (October 2010). The Commissioner should consider changing or amending Rule 4.1 if there is enough support within the league for such a change, and if the Commissioner believes it will be in the best interest of the league.
The Landry’s protest of their game against Evil Empire due to Empire’s previous acquisition of Shaun Hill is not valid. Rule 3.7 of the LOEG Constitution clearly states that challenges to the scoring of games must be made by the following Wednesday at noon after that game in question. Here, The Landry’s is clearly late in their submission of a protest as it was well beyond the window of opportunity to raise such a challenge. However, even if the challenge had been made timely, their protest would be denied because Empire’s technically deficient acquisition of Shaun Hill would not have had an effect on the outcome of their game because he was not in the starting lineup. Proper recourse could have been taken to remove Hill from Empire’s roster, and this still would not have had an effect on the outcome of the game.
The Commissioner’s decisions to remove Brian Westbrook from The Landry’s roster and award him to the Jetnuts are affirmed. The requests made by The Landry’s and Iceman in opposition to Rule 4.1’s prohibition of teams eliminated from playoff contention making add/drops are denied. The Landry’s protest and request for a reversal of the results of his game against Evil Empire is denied. The Court has considered all the evidence presented, but the overall consensus of the entire bench is that there are rules and guidelines delineated in the LOEG Constitution which clearly govern this particular activity within the league. The fact that the Commissioner acted within the confines of the Constitution and applied the rules as codified gives rise to the Court’s decisions, which are made in the best interests of the league.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Fantasy Judgment decision – November 24, 2010 (fantasy football trade issue)
` THE SUPREME COURT OF FANTASY JUDGMENT
John Doe v. Commissioner
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM
AN ANONYMOUS FANTASY FOOTBALL LEAGUE
Decided November 24, 2010
Cite as 2 F.J. 49 (November 2010)
Factual Background
The plaintiff has submitted this case without providing any information about his league. The record is devoid of the following details: type of fantasy football league (i.e., keeper or non-keeper, salary/auction, etc.), platform where the league is hosted (CBS, Yahoo, ESPN), number of teams, roster requirements, point scoring system, records and rosters of the teams involved in the proposed trade, league rules or Constitution, league schedule, and trade approval and/or appellate process.
The plaintiff was offered Vincent Jackson (WR-SD) in a trade in exchange for Eli Manning (QB-NYG). Plaintiff accepted the trade which was then reviewed by the league’s Commissioner. According to the plaintiff, the Commissioner approved the trade on the basis that the trade was “fair for both parties.”
At an undisclosed time after the trade was approved, the plaintiff discovered that this trade had been cancelled. He was not contacted at any time by the Commissioner or the team he traded with. No reason was provided by anyone through any means of communication to explain what happened with the trade and why it was cancelled.
Procedural History
The plaintiff now seeks the Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment’s opinion on whether the subject trade should be put through and its cancellation overturned. There have not been any additional submissions, evidence or testimony provided by anyone else in this fantasy football league.
Assuming the Commissioner has sole authority to approve or reject trades, he did not provide any notice either verbally or in writing that he was overturning his own decision to approve the trade. The plaintiff did not provide the Court with the league’s rules on trading, so the Court will have no choice but to make reasonable and prudent assumptions based on standard and customary fantasy football practices.
Issue Presented
(1) Should the trade between the plaintiff and unnamed league member where the plaintiff acquired Vincent Jackson for Eli Manning be upheld and enforced?
Decision
The Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment typically favors individual fantasy sports participants and teams’ ability to make moves, transactions, and trades. The standard of review has been that people pay money to purchase a team in a league, draft their team, and manage it accordingly. Whether success is bred from that individual’s decision-making is purely left to some skill, luck, dedication, and savviness. See Smittydogs v. Moneyball, 1 F.J. 32, 33 (June 2010).
Because the record is unclear, the Court must assume that the plaintiff and his fellow league members have paid money to participate in this fantasy football league. Therefore, the principles cited above will apply here where people are entitled to manage their teams how they see fit within the rules of the league and free from collusion.
The Court must always consider is whether there is any collusion or under-the-table dealings going on between teams. Since the Court has not been presented with any evidence or accusations of collusion, the Court concludes that there is no collusion between the plaintiff and any other league member.
At first glance, the trade of Eli Manning in exchange for Vincent Jackson looks fair and reasonable. Because the Court was not provided with the rosters of these two teams, it is impossible to determine whether the needs of both teams were met or whether each team was dealing from an area of strength and depth. The Court must look at the two players involved and what their fair market value is both before the trade and their projected benefits after the trade. Eli Manning is having a season with extreme highs and lows. He is on pace to shatter his previous personal records for yards and touchdown passes, but he is also on pace to throw more than 20 interceptions. Granted, several were not his fault as the Giants’ wide receivers were failing to catch passes and instead tipped balls to their opponents. But Eli Manning has never been known for his offensive prowess, especially compared to his brother. With the loss of standout wide receivers Steve Smith and Hakeem Nicks for the next several weeks, Manning’s value has decreased. On the flip side, Vincent Jackson is scheduled to make his 2010 debut with the Chargers on Sunday night against the Colts on national television. Having several successful years under his belt already, Jackson joins the team as the #1 receiver for one of the most prolific passing quarterbacks of this era in Philip Rivers. Jackson should immediately becomes Rivers’ primary target and the recipient of lots of yardage on Rivers’ way to reaching 5,000 yards by the end of the year.
Given that the trade was fair, the Commissioner approved the deal – which was the right decision. Then, for reasons unknown to this Court, the trade was cancelled, much to the chagrin of the plaintiff. Unless a trade is either offered or accepted under the influence of drugs or alcohol, coercion, violence, or threats thereof, people cannot undo their trades just because they may have second thoughts about it. A deal is a deal, especially with the Commissioner’s approval.
Based on the miniscule amount of evidence presented and the facts of this case, the Court holds that the subject trade should be allowed and enforced. The Commissioner’s decision to cancel the trade (or whoever else may be responsible) should be overturned.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
What’s new at Fantasy Judgment?
Besides posting decisions issued by the Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment, I thought I would take some time to update the world (or at least the select audience who reads this) on what has been going on Fantasy Judgment. In addition to the usual business of resolving fantasy sports issues and maintaining the integrity of fantasy sports leagues, I am continually working on promoting and expanding the brand that is Fantasy Judgment. Gaining exposure in the mainstream fantasy sports marketplace is an ongoing task.
On October 25, 2010, I returned to my alma mater, New York Law School, to give a presentation about Fantasy Judgment to the Sports & Entertainment and Intellectual Property law sections. It was a great turnout as I explained the nexus of Fantasy Judgment’s creation and the process in which I formed the business and now currently operate it. As expected, the audience asked a lot of questions which made for a great conversation with the students, most of whom are fantasy sports players themselves. I also generally discussed the business of fantasy sports, which continues to prosper and thrive. It put in perspective for me the need for law schools to include fantasy sports into the curriculum for Sports Law and Intellectual Property classes because it goes to the heart of that particular jurisprudence. I emphasized this with a timeline of how I created the business and why being a lawyer helped me go through the process without the need for outside representation. From registering a domain name, drawing up web design agreements to protect intellectual property rights, applying and registering for a trademark, forming a limited liability company, negotiating contracts with the NFL and other fantasy sports entities, creating business plans, protecting business documents and materials, and shielding myself and my company from potential liabiliy, the application of law was and is prevalent throughout. On top of that, the decisions issued by Fantasy Judgment contain legal writing skills and analyses comparable to what goes into a Blue Book.
This presentation spawned several other opportunities and events in the aftermath of my speech.
- The Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment has retained its first law clerk – Lance Kodish – a student at New York Law School. Lance will assist the Court in doing research and exploring ways to market the brand.
- I was interviewed about Fantasy Judgment by The Sports Tomato (www.thesportstomato.com), a well-written blog that caters to the professional fan focusing on the business and legal side of sports. The interview can be read at http://www.thesportstomato.com/fantasyjudgment-interview/.
- I have begun discussions about a potential partnership with the Fantasy Sports Market (www.fantasysportsmarket.com), a website dedicated to fantasy sports social networking and league fee management systems.
Fantasy Judgment continues to be a presence on SiriusXM’s fantasy sports channel as I heard another case on the Morning Show earlier this month. The guys from RotoExperts (Scott Engel and Adam Ronis) have been great allowing me to judge cases live on the air and pound the proverbial gavel at fantasy sports offenders.
Last but not least, I have had some discussions with the good people at MLB.com about possible collaboration between Fantasy Judgment and MLB.com’s fantasy baseball products. The talks are preliminary with some ideas being tossed around, but hopefully this will lead to something down the road. With Fantasy Judgment already affiliated with the NFL and their fantasy football marketplace, this would be great to form a relationship with Major League Baseball as well.
Time for social networking plugs:
Email: michael.stein@fantasyjudgment.com
Website: www.fantasyjudgment.com
Blog: www.fantasyjudgment.wordpress.com
Twitter: @FantasyJudgment (http://twitter.com/FantasyJudgment
Facebook: www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/pages/Fantasy-Judgment/35940699955?ref=ts
Court is adjourned.
Fantasy Judgment decision – October 29, 2010 (fantasy football trade dispute)
THE SUPREME COURT OF FANTASY JUDGMENT
Juicy Clams v. Butcher
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM “THE LEAGUE”
Decided October 29, 2010
Cite as 2 F.J. 46 (October 2010)
Factual Background
A fantasy football league called The League (hereinafter referred to as “The League” – not to be mistaken with the FX television show called The League) is comprised of twelve (12) teams who compete against each other on a weekly basis during the National Football League (“NFL”) season using the statistics of professional players as a basis for accumulating points in head-to-head competition with opponents to determine which fantasy team won or lost. The League is hosted on the Yahoo fantasy football platform. There is no league Constitution in place to delineate the specific rules and guidelines to govern The League. There is no formal approval process to either accept or reject trades made between teams. The League’s Commissioner has the sole authority to either approve or reject trades made. It is unknown whether a different individual or committee is in place to approve or reject trades made involving the Commissioner.
The League’s point scoring system includes standard points for yardage accumulated by passing, rushing and receiving, 10 points per touchdown for all players (including team defenses), -4 points for all turnovers, and 3 levels of bonus points for yardage milestones for quarterbacks, running backs, wide receivers and tight ends. Rosters are comprised of 13 players, including 4 reserves at any eligible position. Teams must start the following players: QB (1), RB (2), WR (3), TE (1), K (1), and DEF (1).
On October 27, 2010, a trade was made between two team owners in The League. Juicy Clams (3-4) traded Adrian Peterson (RB-MIN) to Butcher (5-2) in exchange for Rashard Mendenhall (RB-PIT), Santana Moss (WR-WAS), and Lee Evans (WR-BUF).
Butcher brought Juicy Clams into The League, and the two of them work with each other. Additionally, Butcher is the brother of The League’s Commissioner. The League’s Commissioner subsequently approved the trade.
Procedural History
The League’s Commissioner seeks Fantasy Judgment’s affirmation of his decision to approve this trade. Other members of The League have vocalized complaints about the trade arguing that the trade is not fair and that there may be some collusion between Juicy Clams and Butcher.
The Commissioner does not believe there is any collusion and also ruled that the trade was fair since Juicy Clams helped fill multiple positions on his roster with the trade of a superstar like Adrian Peterson.
Butcher has submitted a brief to the Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment in support of his argument that the trade was fair and made without a scintilla of wrongdoing. Butcher argues that his aggressive style of fantasy football is indicative of this trade, as well as his draft day trades where he dealt 8 draft picks in order to acquire 3 first round picks. Butcher further argues that the seeds had been planted for the subject trade a week before it was completed. He initially only offered Mendenhall and Moss for Peterson, but Juicy Clams only accepted the deal once Lee Evans was included.
Butcher contends that he is being scrutinized and punished by The League’s Commissioner (his brother) because has improved his team and is now a threat to the top two teams in The League. Butcher has provided a written attestation (to be used in lieu of an affidavit) that he has not entered into any side deals to share monetary winnings with Juice Clams or any other team in The League.
Issue Presented
(1) Should the trade between Juice Clams and Butcher be upheld where Adrian Peterson was dealt for Rashard Mendenhall, Santana Moss and Lee Evans?
Decision
The Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment typically favors individual fantasy sports participants and teams’ ability to make moves, transactions, and trades. The standard of review has been that people pay money to purchase a team in a league, draft their team, and manage it accordingly. Whether success is bred from that individual’s decision-making is purely left to some skill, luck, dedication, and savviness. See Smittydogs v. Moneyball, 1 F.J. 32, 33 (June 2010).
Another factor that the Court must always consider is whether there is any collusion or under-the-table dealings going on between teams. The Court has been presented with some speculative evidence of potential collusion. However, the fact that two league members work with each other and one of them brought the other into the league does not meet the standard of proof necessary to prove collusion. There is no indication that a deal has been entered into between the teams to share players or profit. Just because two league members have a special relationship, such as family members or colleagues, should not preclude them from enjoying a fantasy sports league any less than others who do not have any privities. The mere fact that two league members have access to speak with each other discuss trades is not in itself any evidence of collusive efforts. Additionally, one of the teams involved is the Commissioner’s brother, so any wrongdoing would be a reflection on the Commissioner and it is unlikely that the Commissioner would want to subject himself to such skepticism or scrutiny. Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that there is no collusion between Juice Clams and Butcher.
At first glance, the trade of Adrian Peterson in exchange for Rashard Mendenhall, Santana Moss and Lee Evans looks questionable because Peterson is arguably the second most prolific fantasy football player in the league and the three players he was traded for are not considered marquee superstars with equivalent value. However, based on statistics accumulated thus far in the 2010 season, the trade is not so lopsided. Peterson has rushed for 684 yards and 5 touchdowns. Compared to Rashard Mendenhall’s 532 rushing yards and 5 touchdowns, there is not a huge drop-off between the two as they stand today. Obviously Peterson is a better player and likely will finish the season with better numbers than Mendenhall. But Mendenhall is an effective starting running back on a good team in Pittsburgh and is likely to get the lion’s share of carries in close games down the stretch. On top of Mendenhall, Juice Clams also acquired Santana Moss and Lee Evans. Moss is Donovan McNabb’s primary target in Washington, and he has accumulated 548 receiving yards and 2 touchdowns to date. Evans has come alive the last couple weeks after being dormant for a month, much like the rest of the Buffalo Bills offense. Since Ryan Fitzpatrick has taken over at quarterback, the Bills have been impressive on offense, including putting up 34 points against a solid Baltimore Ravens’ defense. Evans has been at the center of this resurgence and has 286 receiving yards and 4 touchdowns, most of which have come within the last couple weeks.
Another factor to consider is that Juicy Clams have a very weak receiving core outside of Hakeen Nicks. This trade enabled Juicy Clams to replace Peterson with another solid and effective running back, as well as acquire two decent receivers to plug in for an injured Austin Collie and an underachieving Johnny Knox. The impetus for making such a trade may have been Juicy Clams’ panic after losing Tony Romo for possibly the whole season. This may have been a kneejerk reaction to what is going on.
Based on the evidence presented and the facts of this case, the Court holds that the subject trade should be approved. There is no evidence of any sort of collusive effort between Juicy Clams and Butcher. Additionally, the trade is fair. Other league members may have selfish reasons for not wanting the trade to go through or that would argue the trade wasn’t an intelligent one to make. The Court’s role is to evaluate whether a trade is fair in terms of being in the best interest of the league. The Court will not speculate or analyze the intelligence of one team over another based on a trade mutually agreed to. The Court’s role is to measure fairness and not judge stupidity. This trade is fair and should be allowed. Without evidence of collusion, these teams should be permitted to exercise their right to better their respective teams.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Fantasy Judgment decision – October 28, 2010 (fantasy football roster and waiver wire drama)
` THE SUPREME COURT OF FANTASY JUDGMENT
George v. LOEG Commissioner
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM
THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN
Decided October 28, 2010
Cite as 2 F.J. 42 (October 2010)
Factual Background
A fantasy football league called the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (hereinafter referred to as “LOEG”) is comprised of ten (10) teams who compete against each other on a weekly basis during the National Football League (“NFL”) season using the statistics of professional players as a basis for accumulating points in head-to-head competition with opponents to determine which fantasy team won or lost. The LOEG is hosted on the CBSSports fantasy football platform. The league rules regarding add/drops and transactions are delineated in the LOEG Constitution under Section 4 entitled “ADD/DROPS.” The following is the language of the rule within the LOEG Constitution:
4.2 Adding and dropping players to put them on the waiver wire and make them inaccessible to another owner is not acceptable, and will be reversed by the commissioner if he believes that to be the case.
Two weeks ago, the owner of LOEG team Tremendous emailed the LOEG’s Commissioner asking for permission to drop his kicker and pick up a player at another position. Such an action would cause Tremendous’s lineup to become illegal because the league rules require that each team have a kicker in their starting lineup. Tremendous qualified this request with the assurance that he would correct his lineup before games began at 1:00 PM that following Sunday. The LOEG Commissioner granted this request.
After learning of this decision, the owner of LOEG team George performed a similar move where he dropped a player at a position which made his lineup temporarily illegal until he corrected it during that Friday morning’s waiver wire run.
Both Tremendous and George claim that their transactions were not done with any intent to block a player or prove a point to anyone else in the league.
After the LOEG Commissioner approved both of these transactions made by Tremendous and George, the owner of LOEG team Machine distributed an email to the entire league threatening that if the Commissioner did not make a rule preventing such actions, then he would not carry a kicker on his roster until right before NFL games begin that week. Machine has done this for the past two weeks.
George addressed his concern with Machine’s actions by arguing to the LOEG Commissioner that Machine was violating Rule 4.2 regarding the prevention of other teams from acquiring players due to being placed on the waiver wire. The LOEG Commissioner replied that “everyone has been doing this.”
Procedural History
The plaintiff has filed this complaint seeking to compel the LOEG Commissioner to immediately create and enforce a rule that would prevent any team in the league from making their lineups illegal at any time. The plaintiff further argues that a new rule like this will help enforce Rule 4.2 of the LOEG Constitution, which contains the following language:
4.2 Adding and dropping players to put them on the waiver wire and make them inaccessible to another owner is not acceptable, and will be reversed by the commissioner if he believes that to be the case.
The LOEG Commissioner’s official ruling was, in pertinent part:
Rules are made before the season begins. It is bad policy to change rules mid-season. As stated, other teams did it all season. It is unfair to amend rules that we allowed other teams to take advantage of, and possibly win games because of. After the season I will visit these issues to prepare to next year. There is no way for me to know Alex’s intent. He is only doing what has been allowed over the past several weeks.
Issue Presented
(1) Should the LOEG Commissioner create a new rule during the current season to prevent any lineups from being illegal at any time despite having given permission on multiple occasions for teams to temporarily have illegal lineups?
Decision
The Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment is a strong advocate for having written Constitutions that govern fantasy sports leagues. There are a myriad of reasons why the Court believes having a Constitution in place is the best way to run and maintain a fantasy league. One of the primary reasons behind this rationale is that all league members are aware of the rules and guidelines in place that govern the administration and function of the fantasy league. When a league Commissioner writes out the rules and distributes them to the league, it shifts the burden onto the league members to read, understand, and adhere to the rules that are delineated. If a league member has an issue, question or challenge to one of the rules in the Constitution, they are welcome to raise this with the Commissioner before signing it or agreeing to its codification.
Here, the LOEG Constitution clearly states the rule regarding the prevention of hoarding players and the methods for dealing with such circumstances. Although the written rule does not contain language that specifically refers to the intent of an individual, it can certainly be implied that the rule is in place to allow the Commissioner to prevent any acts of intentional blocking of players on the waiver wire. The rule permits the Commissioner to subjectively decide whether there is implicit intent on behalf of the alleged perpetrator. When Tremendous and George asked for permission to temporarily have an illegal lineup, the Commissioner granted these requests and presumably did not suspect any wrongdoing or intent to block the waiver wire.
Machine’s response to these actions was both understandable and improper at the same time. Machine clearly disagreed with the Commissioner’s decisions to permit Tremendous and George to have temporary illegal lineups until the day that NFL games began that week. He publicly voiced his protests and acted on his threat to drop his kicker every week until right before lineups and rosters lock for the week. George then protested Machine’s actions citing the rules and accusing Machine of intentionally blocking the waiver wire. Machine decided to take action by doing what he felt was permissible according to the Commissioner’s precedent for granting such requests to Tremendous and George. The difference is that Tremendous and George only did this for one week whereas Machine has been doing this vindictively for several weeks now.
George’s request for a mid-season rule change is both hypocritical and improper. Machine’s actions affect George and every other team as they all compete for the LOEG playoffs. George, understandably upset at the no-bluff position taken by Machine, saw no problem with his own personal request to do such a thing with his lineup. Now he sees Machine taking such action, without permission, and is requesting a new rule to prevent such actions from taking place at all.
As was mentioned before, the LOEG has a written Constitution which all members received and contains the league’s rules. The Constitution also permits the Commissioner to appropriately handle any issue of first impression not addressed in the Constitution, unless he himself is personally involved in the issue. Here, the Commissioner is a neutral party to the dispute so he was able to make a decision regarding the request for a new rule on his own. More importantly, “there is no valid reason to change the rules during the middle of the season outside of extreme and unforeseeable consequences.” See John Doe v. Fantasy Football League Commissioner, 2 F.J. 21, 22 (October 2010). The Court would only support changing or adding to the rules in mid-season if it is the only option to prevent a complete mutiny or meltdown of a fantasy league. The rule was written in the Constitution not permitting teams from doing what Tremendous and George did. However, the Commissioner utilized his autonomous powers by allowing them to make such moves. The Commissioner consciously felt that Tremendous and George were not doing anything shady, and therefore, granted the requests.
On the other hand, Machine’s actions were deliberate in response to the Commissioner’s decision and have lasted several weeks. However, the net results of Machine’s actions are no different than the net results of what was done by Tremendous and George. Creating a new rule to prohibit such activity after it was already allowed during the season is not fair to the other teams in the league who did not have the opportunity to try and benefit from such action. That is not to say all other teams would have or will do so, but enforcing a new rule will absolutely preclude them from such action. The LOEG Commissioner utilized his authority to make exceptions to Rule 4.2, which he is entitled to do. Since he has already opened the door to allowing exceptions and essentially bypassing the enforcement of that rule, he cannot unring the bell.
The Commissioner has admitted that he will revisit this issue and the rules in place during the off-season. But he is correct in his hesitation to change the rules during the season and begin enforcing a new rule after what has already occurred. Part of the Commissioner’s responsibilities include recognizing when the time is right for an intervention of his power and authority. Here, he has already usurped his own power by going against the rules that he wrote, which technically is fine so long as it is applied consistently to the entire league. If there was a new rule put in place, the Commissioner would then be prejudicing the other teams in the league that never received the benefit of bypassing Rule 4.2.
The Commissioner’s decision not to create a new rule during the season to prohibit activity that he himself has already allowed is affirmed. A reminder can be sent out to the rest of the league citing to Rule 4.2, and hopefully the other league members will continue to adhere to this rule as they have done all season. But once the Commissioner implicitly and explicitly allowed Tremendous, George and Machine to temporarily have illegal rosters, he opened the door to everyone because the rules should apply equally to all league members. Additionally, the Commissioner does have constitutionally-written authority to intervene if he feels there is intent to block the waiver wire. He still may utilize this authority if there is sufficient evidence of such activity. Machine’s actions raise a red flag and are subject to the scrutiny of the LOEG Constitution. A distinction would have to be made by the Commissioner differentiating the actions by Tremendous and George as opposed to Machine’s potential egregious intent to block the waiver wire. Based on the evidence presented, the Court’s affirmation of the Commissioner’s decision not to change the rules mid-season is made with the best interests of the league in mind.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Fantasy Judgment decision – October 26, 2010 (fantasy football trade dispute)
THE SUPREME COURT OF FANTASY JUDGMENT
Silveramo v. Nation
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM
AN ANONYMOUS FANTASY FOOTBALL LEAGUE
Decided October 26, 2010
Cite as 2 F.J. 38 (October 2010)
Factual Background
A complaint has been filed by a member of an anonymous fantasy football league (hereinafter referred to as “FFL”) challenging a trade made between two other teams. It is unknown what website the FFL is hosted on. The complaint is also devoid of additional information regarding the structure of the league, including whether it is a keeper league or how many teams there are. It is also unknown what the FFL’s rules are regarding trades and the approval process. There is no reference to a league Constitution and no rules or guidelines were provided in the complaint.
Starting lineups in the FFL consist of the following: QB (1), RB (2), WR (2), TE (1), FLEX (1 – RB/WR/TE), K (1), and DEF/ST (1). The scoring system for the FFL is as follows:
Passing
Touchdown = 4 points
Every 40 Yards = 1 point
Bonus at 300 Yards = 3 points
Rushing/Receiving
Touchdown = 6 points
Every 20 Yards = 1 point
Bonus at 100 Yards = 3 points
Touchdown Bonuses
Passing, Rushing, Receiving TD of 40-59 Yards = 2 points
Passing, Rushing, Receiving TD of 60-79 Yards = 4 points
Passing, Rushing, Receiving TD of 80+ Yards = 6 points
Receptions
Each reception = .5 points beginning with the 4th reception.
0-3 catches = 0 points
4 catches = 2 points
5 catches = 2.5 points
The plaintiff has challenged a trade made between Silveramo, the 1st place team in his division (5-2), and Nation, the 3rd place team in his respective division (4-3). Silveramo has offered to trade LeSean McCoy (RB-PHI), Ben Roethlisberger (QB-PIT), and Brandon Lloyd (WR-DEN) to Nation in exchange for Chris Johnson (RB-TEN), Kevin Kolb (QB-PHI), and Jeremy Maclin (WR-PHI).
Procedural History
The complaining party, on behalf of the rest of the FFL, is challenging the validity of this trade. Specifically, they question how this trades improves Nation who gave up Chris Johnson, arguably the best running back in the NFL (and the likely #1 draft pick in most fantasy football leagues this season), in exchange for LeSean McCoy who is on a bye this coming week (Week 8). Additionally, the complaining party argues that Nation does not need Brandon Lloyd because, according to the complaint, “he has great receivers.” The receivers on Nation’s roster at the time of this proposed trade include Anquan Boldin (WR-BAL), DeSean Jackson (WR-PHI), and Roy Williams (WR-DAL). Finally, the complaining party argues that Ben Roethlisberger constitutes an upgrade at quarterback over Donovan McNabb and Matt Ryan. However, he questions the significance of this upgrade when only one quarterback is in the starting lineup every week.
It was conceded in the complaint that there is no suspicion of collusion or cheating between Silveramo and Nation. The nature of the complaint is whether the trade was intelligently entered into.
Issue Presented
(1) Should the trade between Silveramo and Nation be approved?
Decision
The Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment typically favors individual fantasy sports participants and teams’ ability to make moves, transactions, and trades. See Smittydogs v. Moneyball, 1 F.J. 32, 33 (June 2010). The standard of review has been that people pay money to purchase a team in a league, draft their team, and manage it accordingly. Whether success is bred from that individual’s decision-making is purely left to some skill, luck, dedication, and savviness. The Court also acknowledges that the analysis for evaluating trades is much different in a keeper league than a non-keeper league. A trade that may look uneven or lopsided on its face may receive a different opinion when it is involved in a keeper league. The reasons for this are obvious, but must be restated. In a keeper league, teams that are having unsuccessful seasons are more likely to continue to pay attention and make moves that will set themselves up for better success in the following season. They can do this by acquiring young talent that is not under contract within the league, or by dumping salary (assuming it is an auction league) and allowing greater financial flexibility to sign key players in the next season’s draft. In non-keeper leagues, there is no rationale for thinking ahead, nor is there any need to stockpile young, inexpensive talent. However, it is not known whether the FFL is a keeper league or not. As a result, the standard of review will assume that it is not a keeper league and the Court will analyze the players involved in the trade based on their current and past statistics and performance as opposed to projections for future NFL seasons.
Another factor that the Court must always consider is whether there is any collusion or under-the-table dealings going on between teams. As stated above, the complaining party has admitted that there are no allegations of collusion or cheating. Therefore, the Court will forego an analysis into this scenario.
At first glance, the trade of LeSean McCoy, Ben Roethlisberger and Brandon Lloyd in exchange for Chris Johnson, Kevin Kolb and Jeremy Maclin looks fair and even. The eye-catcher in this deal is clearly Chris Johnson, arguably the best running back in the NFL in both reality and in fantasy. Any trade involving the #1 overall pick and most dominant fantasy player is going to create controversy and invite skepticism. However, when the numbers and statistics are broken down, Johnson and McCoy are practically even.
Rush Yds Receptions Rec. Yards Touchdowns
Chris Johnson 662 17 66 7
LeSean McCoy 477 38 293 5
Johnson’s success has made him a target for NFL defenses, and it is obvious that teams are focusing on shutting Johnson down to prevent his prototypical breakout run. This means that putting up similar statistics to what he did in 2009 will almost be impossible. On the other hand, LeSean McCoy has become the focus of the Philadelphia Eagles offense in both the passing and running games. Cumulatively, McCoy currently has more total yards (770) than Johnson (728), has double the number of receptions, and is almost identical in scoring touchdowns. Consequently, there is not much of a drop-off at all in trading Johnson for McCoy. The argument that this makes no sense because McCoy has a bye week this weekend is speculative. While it is true that the Eagles have their bye week, analyzing the rationale as to why this trade was made and when it was made is a process that the Court refuses to do.
To help make up the perceived difference in trading Johnson, Nation was able to acquire Ben Roethlisberger and Brandon Lloyd. Roethlisberger is certainly an upgrade over Kolb as Big Ben has almost eclipsed Kolb’s statistics despite playing in three less games. Big Ben is also an upgrade over the other two quarterbacks that he now shares a fantasy roster with – Donovan McNabb and Matt Ryan. The question over the sensibility of this trade because teams only start one quarterback per week is unfounded. Any fantasy football participant has the right (so long as the roster and rules allow it) to accumulate as many backups for position depth, injuries, and trade bait. Nation’s acquisition of Brandon Lloyd was also needed because DeSean Jackson is questionable for the near future due to the severe concussion he sustained during Week 6. Nation clearly needed a wide receiver, and since the Eagles are off this week, he included Jeremy Maclin in the deal for Lloyd, who will immediately become a starter. His needs were clearly served and he got fair market value for Chris Johnson.
The exchange of fair value is also demonstrated by Silveramo’s acquisitions from his perspective. He acquired Kolb when he already has Michael Vick. The Eagles have shown that they can score points no matter who is playing quarterback. Having both the starter and backup ensures that Silveramo will have an effective starting quarterback every week. Acquiring Jeremy Maclin gives Silveramo a good QB-WR combination, which is just as effective no matter who the quarterback is in Philadelphia.
More importantly, the complaining party has admitted that he is not challenging this trade based on collusion, cheating or any other reason besides it being dumb. The scope of the Court’s authority is to govern and advise when there is a dispute as to the validity of trades, rulings, decisions or other issues that arise within fantasy sports leagues. Making a judgment on whether an individual did something stupid is not what the Court does. As stated earlier, teams should be given the opportunity to make deals and try and improve their teams, even if that means they will make unintelligent decisions from time to time.
Based on the fact that the players involved in the trade are fair and equal coupled with the admission that the complaining party seeks Court intervention due to the trade allegedly being “stupid,” the Court hereby decides that the subject trade is fair and should be allowed. The subjective reasons why teams make trades should not be speculated about unless there is tangible evidence of collusion and the nature of the complaint provides sufficient information and background to corroborate such a story.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
