Are these pujols trades vetoable?

[tal1286]

So this owner has been offering some crappy offers recently.

He offered me Craig Monroe/Brady Clark for Crawford, which I rejected out of hand.

Anyway, he offered this trade:
His Pujols and Carlos Guillen
for
Aubrey Huff and Jose Reyes

Which I voted against and it got vetoed.

THEN he offered this one:

Pujols, Guillen, Luis Gonzalez (ARI), Gustavo Chacin
for
Huff, Reyes, and Chris Ray

That one got vetoed before I even saw it. I think you could probably get all 3 of those players for pujols alone if you had 2 sucky players to drop and you really wanted to trade him even though I would never do that trade.

Are those vetoable? He posted a message that said that he has his reasons.

[Pogotheostrich]

Unless he is actually Albert Pujols posting from the hospital, I'd say his reasons suck.

[TheYanks04]

I would have vetoed and not thought twice about it. I am not one for this caveat emptor, as long as some BS spin can be made to justify it, it should be allowed. A first rounder was being dealt and the closest thing to a first rounder being sent back was Reyes, a 3rd or 4th rounder.

[The Jury]

Sorry your usage of "you," "he," and "I" has me all confused

[Fenway05]

Unless he is actually Albert Pujols posting from the hospital, I'd say his reasons suck.

I agree, I hate guy like this. They just waste your time and fill up your e-mail with this crap!

[Art Vandelay]

Not vetoable. Maybe he thinks Huff is going to put up similar numbers to 2003 (.311, 34 hr, 107 rbi). You have to let people manage their teams how they see fit and follow their hunches. Someone may have vastly different projections for this season than you have, and they should be allowed to act on them.

[RugbyD]

I would demand explanation since the trades look highly suspect. If he has his reasons, he should be very able to share them. If he's starving for SBs, i can't veto the trade.

[TheYanks04]

I would demand explanation since the trades look highly suspect. If he has his reasons, we should be very able to share them. If he's starving for SBs, i can't veto the trade.

Oh sure you can. This is not August and he is not fighting for a title.

[Matthias]

I would have vetoed and not thought twice about it. I am not one for this caveat emptor, as long as some BS spin can be made to justify it, it should be allowed. A first rounder was being dealt and the closest thing to a first rounder being sent back was Reyes, a 3rd or 4th rounder.

bingo. i am a bit more willing to veto things, but don't think this is really a defensible trade. if people want, we can have another ad nauseum argument on the morality of vetoing absent a concurrent email to the league, "psstttt... we're doing this trade because we agreed that player A has no chance in this league and player B agreed to buy pizza for the rest of the week as long as player A does the deal" but any defense of the trade on its merits or balanced current market value is going to be really, really, really reaching.

regardless of a person's individual speculations/fantasies on how a particular player may perform, there is still relatively established market values that dictate that they could get the player they insanely covet and more, as well.

tell the player who is trying to fire-sale pujols to walk out onto a frozen lake, bore himself a hole, and then jump in. maybe that will shock him into some sense.

[acsguitar]

Hammy?