New Fantasy Judgment decision – fantasy baseball trade rejected (Cole Hamels, again)

SUPREME COURT OF FANTASY JUDGMENT

4 Ponies v. Beaver Hunters

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM THE INCONTINENT LEAGUE 

Decided June 15, 2011

Cite as 3 F.J. 37 (June 2011)

Factual Background

A rotisserie fantasy baseball league (hereinafter referred to as “Roto league” or “The Incontinent League”) utilizing an auction-style draft and transaction platform seeks an evaluation of a trade made between two teams within the Roto league.  This is an NL-only keeper league where each team is permitted to maintain up to ten (10) players during each off-season with each individual player allowed to be kept for a maximum of three (3) years.  Each team is also permitted to keep two minor league players which are in addition to the ten players kept.  This Roto league also has a $36.00 in-season salary cap that is applicable for all teams.   

As with many rotisserie leagues, the subject Roto league uses the standard 5×5 scoring categories to determine the standings and prize money.  For offensive players, the five categories are: (1) batting average; (2) homeruns; (3) runs batted in; (4) runs scored; and (5) stolen bases.  For pitchers, the five categories are: (1) wins; (2) earned run average; (3) WHIP (walks+hits/innings pitched); (4) strikeouts; and (5) saves.  Statistics are cumulative throughout the course of the season and there are no head to head games contained within the Roto league.

Procedural History

The 4 Ponies have made a trade with the Beaver Hunters.  The 4 Ponies traded Jhoulys Chacin (SP-COL), Jordan Lyles (SP-HOU), and Randy Wolf (SP-MIL) to the Beaver Hunters in exchange for Cole Hamels (SP-PHI) and Leo Nunez (RP-FLA).

Previously, the Court rejected a trade between these two teams for the same players minus Randy Wolf.  See 4 Ponies v. Beaver Hunters, 3 F.J. 26 (June 2011) (holding that the package of Jhoulys Chacin and Jordan Lyles was not sufficient compensation for Cole Hamels and Leo Nunez, thus undermining the best interests of the league due to the inequity of the trade).  Now, the Court is being asked to consider this trade with Wolf being added to balance out the equitability of the deal.  The Court was made aware that several members of The Incontinent League challenged that trade as being too lopsided, and the Court subsequently agreed. 

Issue Presented

(1)   Should the modified trade between the 4 Ponies and the Beaver Hunters be upheld and approved?

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.  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.

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 not been presented with any evidence of such malfeasance, so assumptions will be made that this is not an issue. 

The Court has always held that the approval or rejection of a trade is based purely on its fairness, free from collusion, and in the best interests of the league.  Whether a trade is intelligent or popular will not be part of the analysis.  The virtue of a trade is measured in both quantifiable criteria and subjective needs of the teams involved.  See Carson City Cocks v. Stud Muffins, 3 F.J. 23, 24 (May 2011).

At first glance, the trade of Jhoulys Chacin, Randy Wolf and Jordan Lyles in exchange for Cole Hamels and Leo Nunez does not look even.  The reason for initial pause is identical to the rationale from the previous incarnation of this trade.  See 4 Ponies v. Beaver Hunters, 3 F.J. 26, 27 (June 2011) (holding that the trade did not appear even on its face because Hamels is unequivocally one of the top pitchers in both real and fantasy baseball, and any trade he is involved in should likely have a player of equal or approximate value on the other side).  Additionally, Nunez is one of the top closers in the National League which makes him anything but a throw-in in the deal.  The package in return includes three starting pitchers with varying degrees of success and consistency.  As stated in the previous case, Chacin is the best pitcher in the package and he has only had a modicum of success in his brief professional career.  He is certainly worthy of being designated an up and coming prospect, but hardly worth a player of Hamels’ stature alone.  Lyles has impressed the Astros enough to remain in their starting rotation, even after Wandy Rodriguez was activated.  This was not anticipated when the Court previously denied this trade, so the Court recognizes that Lyles’ value is marginally greater than before due to his remainder on the big league roster.  The addition of Randy Wolf is what the Court is being asked to consider as the balancing factor in the deal.  In general, Wolf has never been more than an average pitcher in both real and fantasy baseball.  He is a crafty veteran that is neither a short-term solution or part of the long-term plan on a keeper league fantasy baseball team.  The Court now provides a statistical comparison amongst the players:

Player	Wins	ERA	Strikeouts	WHIP	Saves
Cole Hamels	9	2.49	97	0.92	0
Leo Nunez	0	3.30	32	1.20	19
Jhoulys Chacin	7	2.90	74	1.09	0
Randy Wolf	4	3.20	65	1.23	0
Jordan Lyles	0	4.15	12	1.21	0

From looking at these players’ current statistics, it can be argued that the numbers amongst the starting pitchers is equivalent because their totals are not far apart.  In fact, the Beaver Hunters would be getting back more wins (13) collectively than Hamels has attained on his own (9).  But that cannot be the lens in which this trade is viewed.  Hamels currently leads the National League in both wins and WHIP.  As stated earlier, Nunez leads the National League in saves with 19.  In this NL-only fantasy baseball league, they are arguably two of the most valuable players in the entire league.  Loading up multiple players whose cumulative statistics equal or surpass one individual’s superstar statistics does not necessarily make a trade fair or even.  Granted, Chacin has been impressive and looks to be a legitimate pitching prospect.  But he is hardly a sure thing and cannot be considered equivalent value for Hamels.

When analyzing the fairness and equity of a trade, the Court will consider each team’s individual needs to assess whether the trade subjectively made sense from each team’s perspective.  See Cajon Crawdads vs. Carson City Cocks, 1 F.J. 41, 42 (June 2010) (upholding a trade for Jason Bay because of the Carson City Cocks’ desperate need for a starting outfielder due to the demotion of Cameron Maybin).  Since this incarnation of the trade only includes an additional mediocre starting pitcher, the Court will adopt its prior reasoning in terms of the needs of each team and their respective rosters.  See 4 Ponies v. Beaver Hunters, 3 F.J. 26, 28 (June 2011) (holding that no reasonable inference can be made as to how the Beaver Hunters benefit at all from the trade given how their current roster is construed).

In terms of keeper league status and salary cap value, this trade doesn’t make sense either.  Nunez only costs $0.10 and is in his final year under contract, which means he will be available in the 2012 draft.  However, Hamels is only in his first year under contract and can still be kept for an additional two years at $3.10.  It must be considered where these players are in terms of their career which is helpful in analyzing possible motivation to perform.  Hamels is arbitration-eligible after the season when his current contract expires with the Phillies.  He is clearly motivated to justify seeking an arbitration award comparable to Tim Lincecum’s record-setting deal.  After he likely agrees to a one-year contract with the Phillies, he will be pitching in 2012 as a pending free agent.  This should serve as an extra motivating factor for him to succeed as he will likely be seeking Roy Halladay/Cliff Lee type years and dollars on the open market.  The Beaver Hunters have him locked up under contract for these important seasons.  To trade him away for unequivocal value in return is incomprehensible.  Even assuming arguendo that Jhoulys Chacin’s potential is equivalent for Hamels’ current value, Chacin is only signed for one more year before he re-enters the Incontinent League’s draft.  So the Beaver Hunters are missing out on one whole year of productivity in this exchange.  From a financial standpoint, the Beaver Hunters are only gaining $1.60 in net salary cap space by making this trade (Wolf only costs $0.10 and still has two years left on his contract).  In a league with a $36.00 salary cap, that does not represent a significant enough amount when dealing with a players of Hamels’ magnitude.

As referenced in Smittydogs v. Moneyball, 1 F.J. 32, 34 (June 2010), the dichotomy between the 4 Ponies and the Beaver Hunters’ motivations is precisely why the Court must look at trades in keeper leagues differently than non-keeper leagues.  If this trade had been made in a non-keeper league, the Court would vehemently reject it. 

It should be reiterated that the Court typically favors a league owner’s ability to make trades and manager the roster according to his/her own preferences and judgments.  When a person pays money to participate in a fantasy league, the presumption is that he/she is permitted to make whatever decisions they feel are best for their team.  However, when a trade such as this is proposed, it throws off the competitive balance of the league and creates a slippery slope for future trades.  The Court has no issues with the idea of trading Cole Hamels and/or Leo Nunez.  However, given what the Beaver Hunters were receiving in return, the Court cannot endorse such a maneuver due to the inequity of the return package.  Even adding Randy Wolf to the trade does not even out the trade enough to prevent it from unjustly throwing off the competitive balance of the league.  The Court must consider the impact and effect on the overall league when determining whether a trade should be accepted or rejected.  Based on the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby decides that the subject trade, in this current incarnation is unfair, uneven, and should be modified again before being granted approval.  The trade should be rejected as it still fails to comport with the best interests of the league.

IT IS SO ORDERED.