Everyone is welcome to reply...

Trying to get as many opinions as I can as this "loophole" was recently brought up in our keeper league of going on 5 years now.

I run a 10 team keeper league with 26 man rosters.

Every player is under a 3 year keeper contract.

If a player is drafted for the 1st time in 2012, they are eligible to be declared a keeper in 2013, 2014, and 2015 at the round they were drafted in 2012.

If a player was drafted in 2009 in round 10. He could have been kept in round 10 in 2010, 2011, and finally 2012. After 2012, he would go back into the player pool for the 2013 draft.

If a player is drafted and not kept the following year, his clock starts over.

If Team A trades Coco Crisp in RD 23 to Team B for Cameron Maybin in RD 21. Then Team A inherits Cameron Maybin in RD 21 and his keeper status left on him and does not get a RD 21 pick at the draft. Also, Team B gets Coco Crisp and inherits his keeper status left on him and does not get a RD 23 pick at the draft.

The "loophole" has come up in the past 2-3 days. Our keeper declare date is February 27, 2012.

Right now, Team A owns the rights to Prince Fielder as he drafted him in RD 1 in 2011. Team A finished 7th place last year which entitles him to the # 3 overall pick in 2012 if he does not keep Prince. If he does keep Prince, Prince will take that spot and Team A will not have a 1st round pick.

Team B does not have anyone on his roster that was drafted in RD 1 in 2011. He finished in 5th place last year which slots him in as the # 5 overall pick in 2012.

Remember, this is all pre-keeper declared stage, no players have been turned into me as keepers, all teams still have 2+ weeks to decide.

Team B wants to offer Mike Trout in RD 19 who can be kept 2012, 2013, and 2014 as well as his 1st round pick (#5 overall) to Team A for Team A's 1st round pick (#3 overall).

Herein lies the scenario that comes up. If they agree to this trade, Team A would then pick up Mike Trout in RD 19 and the #5 overall pick in RD 1. Team B would pick up the #3 overall pick in RD 1.

Should Team A still be allowed to keep Prince Fielder as long as he gives up the #5 overall pick slot he just traded for? He basically moved back 2 slots and picked up Mike Trout in the process and then keeps Prince because he still owns a pick in RD 1.

Team A actually thinks is "double dipping" and that if he trades his 1st RD pick for another 1st RD pick, keeping Prince at a lower draft slot is unfair?


I hope you could follow all of that, opinions are welcomed!


Thanks!

To me I think this is the problem: if a team has Fielder in the first round, and wants to keep him, he does not have a first round pick to trade. If they traded a hypothetical future round pick already, (say traded first round pick for Cano from the second round) then they don't have a first round pick and can't keep a first round player. If it was a second round player they wanted to keep but did not have a second round pick, then they could keep them with their first round pick, or they can't keep them.

Not sure why Team B wants to make this trade, but if both teams agree to a trade what's the problem? Are they in collusion? If not, then it must be fair.

Well that is the problem. Team A wants to keep Fielder, but he doesn't have to declare him a keeper until Feb 27.

If he trades his 1st round pick # 3 overall today, for Team B's # 5 overall, he will still have a "Round 1 Pick" which will allow him the ability to keep Prince in Round 1, when that # 5 pick comes in the draft, we will skip over him because Prince takes up that spot.

Does that make sense?

And Grey, Team B is a retard, that is why he is trying to make this deal.

Okay, so if he does still have a first round pick and wants to keep Fielder, then what is the problem? He was going to keep Fielder either way and basically gets Trout a keeper in round 19? Team B gets to jump up two spots and can beat out whoever had the 4th pick for a slightly better player that he wanted more.

I guess I should say, the problem from league members is that Team A should be using "his 1st rd pick" to keep Fielder. He shouldn't be allowed to trade his 1st RD pick away, gain another one, and use the one he gained to "keep Prince". Some league members believe once you trade away "your 1st RD pick", meaning, that you earned by the way you finished in standings in 2011" you forfeit the right to keep a player in Round 1. You should not be allowed to gain someone else's 1st RD pk in a trade and then use that one to keep a player in Round 1.

I'm indifferent either way, we just have some league members upset so I said I would post this and get 3rd party opinions.

I think the potential issue with a rule like that would be in-season draft pick trades. What if the last place team trades their 1st round draft pick during the season and later on in the season acquires another 1st round draft pick from the first place team? Would they forfeit their right to keep a player in the first round and on top of that be the last team to draft a player after finishing the previous season as the worst team? It seems like it would be really complicated to govern that way. If you just make the rule "If you don't have an X round pick, you have to either keep a player selected in X round one round higher than he was selected or not be allowed to keep him at all" things will be a lot easier to manage. Team B sounds kind of stupid for making the trade, but he is moving up in the draft a little bit, so he is getting something out of it at least.

I am in a league that is ran the exact same way. The way we run it, is you are not allowed to include draft picks in trades until after keepers are turned in. Meaning, if the team trades for prince fielder (pre keeper turn in), then he would have to use his first round pick to keep prince. Once all teams have turned in there keepers and rounds open have been established, we then open up a one week window where people can involve draft slots in trades.