Commish Veto

[1337_Dude]

The deal itself looks fair, but I can see where you comish is coming from.

[great gretzky]

this is one of those where I don't knwo what to tell you.

the thing with fantasy is the "swing"

Usually, you trade smoltz, then you don't get his stats, and they are used against you.

But this trade is fairly on target too.

I think I might be of the opinion that if the person has say 250 innings (or so, not doing the math) the commish has a point, smoltz won't make enough of a difference. But at the same time, its not the commih's job to be paying attention to games played and IP. I think at this point, his job should be to see if the trade meets some general defi9nition of "approximate" value, and leave it at that. Or, if "approximate value" can't be met, then looking to see if specific points could be made up overall by such a trade.

Since your trade meets criteria one, It should go through.

[ukrneal]

You can easily post the innings limit here. Just look at his team page.

Regardless, I would not veto. I don't understand how anyone would. Even if he is closer than most, maybe he thinks Soriano is going to tank. Or maybe he plans on a short rotation and Smoltz is better than his other pitchers. Who knows? Point is, it isn't the job of the commish to play for the other manager.

[winterball22]

How does the Commish know, that he doesn't have another deal brewing to unload some pitching to get his innings down. This trade might of been one part of a bigger deal with another owner. Shoudn't of been vetoed.

[winterball22]

How does the Commish know, that he doesn't have another deal brewing to unload some pitching to get his innings down. This trade might of been one part of a bigger deal with another owner. Shoudn't of been vetoed.

[Bricklayer]

How does the Commish know, that he doesn't have another deal brewing to unload some pitching to get his innings down. This trade might of been one part of a bigger deal with another owner. Shoudn't of been vetoed.

Excellent point!

[Kingctb27]

If it's a keeper I say its fine, if not, I would probably have to do the same thing or think long and hard about it.

[bleach168]

How does the Commish know, that he doesn't have another deal brewing to unload some pitching to get his innings down. This trade might of been one part of a bigger deal with another owner. Shoudn't of been vetoed.

Excellent point!

Well, if you allow the trade and then the guy doesn't make another move and wastes Smoltz, you can't retroactively fix that.

Commish should have suspended the trade and asked the trader if he knew what he was doing and understood he was close to the innings limit.

[Deuce]

This is a good reason to join keeper leagues. If, as I assume, this is not. If this is a keeper league, Smoltz' value for next year make this trade worth it. And, even if this is not a keeper, the owner has probably chosen to use Smoltz with the few innings he has remaining. He's not a bad choice to use your last innings on.

Not vetoable at all.

[winterball22]

"Commish should have suspended the trade and asked the trader if he knew what he was doing and understood he was close to the innings limit."
He is a commish, not a babysitter, the commish has to beleive that he has competent owners. Would the commish question FAAB pickups, Waiverwire pick ups? It would be never ending.