Should this trade be vetoed???

[Madison]

Trades should only be vetoed if it is suspected that collusion was involved.

That reasoning again? How bout for the integrity of the league you should veto trades? Trades arent gonna be even always, as this one isnt. But this one isnt even close really. Ishii is on the DL let us not forget. Dunn is barely over .200 and so the deal is basically Jeter and .200 hitting Dunn for the games best hitter right now in Pujols, and a pitcher that has been pretty darn good all year in Williams.
I'd consider a veto this deal. I'd have to hear some reasoning as to why someone was wanting to give up two really good players for 1 decent player and the other two so-so players. I'd suspect something was up too if this were a team in contention getting Pujols side and the other team was out of it.

Ok, here's another way to look at it:

Ishii will be back and sports a good era and k's. Bad whip, and lack of run support, but good for era and k's.
Jeter's power is returning as seen by his 2 home run game yesterday, so there should be no concern over his injury.
Dunn has hit better since the break and has power. He's also been hitting cleanup lately.

For

Woody Williams has slowed down considerably. You should be looking to trade him away, not acquire him at this point.
Pujols is the best right now.

Doesn't look as bad as you make it out to be. It just depends on how you look at it. Certainly not worth a veto.

[Jack-In-A-Box]

Vetoing trades is a matter of opinion for alot of different reasons. But like i said.. i would "consider" a veto on this trade. Not meaning i would do it.. but i'd think about it for sure. Probably in the end i wouldnt veto because i think we should all be allowed to run teams our way. I used to not think that way.. but since playin now for a while ive learned what i thought might be not fair and vetoed.. At the end of the year it turned out for the better of the guy i thought was getting ripped. You never know how trades are gonna work out for one guy or another. So pretty much i decided i wouldnt veto unless it was a matter of complete stupidity. But on close calls like this trade id take into acct if the person getting rid of Pujols was out of contention and the other guy was close to winning.. then you'd have to wonder if this wasnt a move by one owner to push someone ahead.
Maybe Madison is right after lookin at the points he brought out.

[Madison]

Maybe Madison is right after lookin at the points he brought out.

I do agree that it's lopsided, even with the points I brought up. I just don't think it calls for a veto.