Fantasy Baseball Cafe Forums

by **raygunpunx** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:46 pm

I get Beltran

I'm giving up Clemens and Victorino

14 team head to head points league

Other owner was the one that offered it as he is desperate for pitching

by **bballplayapg1124** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:36 pm

yea thats a little unfair

victorino is not an established player and clemens is aging

by **Danger** » Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:08 am

I'm afraid I would've vetoed as well. That's just way too lopsided to let by. If he's really desperate for pitching he could've gotten any other pitcher in the league, maybe even Santana.

by **raygunpunx** » Sat Jun 02, 2007 9:22 am

bballplayapg1124 wrote:yea thats a little unfair

victorino is not an established player and clemens is aging

Clemens is aging?? He had the lowest ERA in baseball last year

by **sportsfan1433** » Sat Jun 02, 2007 10:51 am

raygunpunx wrote:
bballplayapg1124 wrote:yea thats a little unfair

victorino is not an established player and clemens is aging

Clemens is aging?? He had the lowest ERA in baseball last year

people do gennerally age as they get older ;-)

by **raygunpunx** » Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:31 am

sportsfan1433 wrote:
raygunpunx wrote:
bballplayapg1124 wrote:yea thats a little unfair

victorino is not an established player and clemens is aging

Clemens is aging?? He had the lowest ERA in baseball last year

people do gennerally age as they get older

He was using the term aging as a reason why the deal is unfair.

by **CBMGreatOne** » Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:55 pm

raygunpunx wrote:
sportsfan1433 wrote:
raygunpunx wrote:
bballplayapg1124 wrote:yea thats a little unfair

victorino is not an established player and clemens is aging

Clemens is aging?? He had the lowest ERA in baseball last year

people do gennerally age as they get older

He was using the term aging as a reason why the deal is unfair.

The other day Clemens was traded in my league for Embree and Snell.

That deal wasn't vetoed as Snell is off to a great start and had been a sleeper coming into the season. I felt like the guy getting Clemens got a steal, but I didn't vote against the trade.

This one, I'd probably vote to veto. Beltran is too good to give up for those two, but it does depend on the circumstances. Depending on the scoring system, roster considerations, level of activity of the guy giving up Beltran etc. would be what I based my decision on. Value for value, it's a little unfair, maybe vetoable, though I'm sure a chorus of "No vetoes except for collusion will likely follow this post."

I, of course, think there are other reasons to veto besides proof of collusion.

by **Danger** » Sat Jun 02, 2007 5:54 pm

Point is that Beltran is worth a tier 2 SP at least and even though Clemens can arguably come back and put up better than tier 2 pitcher numbers, why should I settle for an aging Clemens who is relatively unproven at this point in the year for someone like Peavy or Oswalt? I think aging is a very fair argument here, he's 44 years old and announced just today that he's not going to start on Monday because of a sore groin.

by **KSJayhawk** » Sat Jun 02, 2007 5:59 pm

I wouldn't veto a trade like this in my league, unless it was obvious collusion. Sometimes people need to make a lopsized trade to get what they need to make movement in categories that will help them win. Now I am not saying this is a smart trade or not by the other owner, but I wouldn't veto it if the owner was trying to improve himself in the standings.