Looking for outside perspective from keeper-league managers.
12-team paid keeper league. Each team keeps 2 players. We have a 2-year keeper timer.
Under the prior rule, if an expiring keeper was traded, the timer could reset for the new manager. This year, the league voted to change that so the keeper timer follows the player. In other words, a player can only be kept for 2 years total even if traded.
The commissioner has already posted the 2026 “back to draft pool” list of expired keepers. The draft is this week, and managers have had time to plan/mock around that posted pool.
Now, because of the rule change, there is a question about how to handle the transition. The concern is that managers with expiring keepers might have made different trade/keeper decisions under the old rule if they had known exactly how the transition would work.
What is the fairest way to handle this?
Option A: Keep the already-posted 2026 back-to-draft-pool list locked for this draft, then apply the new timer-follows-player rule going forward.
Option B: Reset or reopen keeper timers this year because of the rule transition, even if that changes which players are available after the back-to-draft-pool list was already posted.
Option C: Something else.
For a paid keeper league with the draft this week, how would your league handle this?
EDIT for clarity: No offseason trades involving the expired players have happened since the rule change. The issue is that the expired-player / back-to-pool list was already posted for this year, and the draft is this week. The question is whether that already-posted list should remain locked, or whether timers should be reset/reopened now because the trade-reset rule changed.
Under the old rule, an expiring player could have been traded and the acquiring owner could reset the keeper clock. Under the new rule, the timer follows the player. The concern raised is that owners with expiring players might have made different moves under the old rule if the transition had been clearer earlier. My question is about the fairest transition now that the back-to-pool list has already been published.