Is this deal vetoable & why?

[powenM]

Both owners involved like the deal. One is going for it this year the other says hesbuilding for the future.
Its a 12 teamer 8ply keeper league.
keep in mind i can guarantee there is NO COLLUSION in this deal.

Owner A (3rd place) sends:
Gary Matthews Jr.
Chad Billingsley
Homer Bailey
to
Owner B (12th place) for;
Vernon Wells
Daisuke Matsuzaka

[Oatsdad]

Not remotely vetoable, especially if you're SURE there's no collusion. But I'm not sure why anyone would suspect collusion here anyway - it's not a suspicious trade IMO...

[powenM]

Y I mean DiceK was rated higher as a prospect then those 2 SPs & VWells is much better then Matthews

Rem this is a small keeper - only 8

Most in lg are saying this is ridiculous.

[CBMGreatOne]

Yes it is vetoable. I would probably vote to veto it myself. I understand that Homer Bailey is a great prospect, but let me put it to you plainly: he has been absolutely terrible.

Gary Matthews Jr. is not as good a player as Vernon Wells though the difference is arguable not very extreme.

Billingsley for Daisuke is ludicrous in any format. Billingsley has had one good start after spending most of his career in the bullpen. Kyle Lohse had an 11K 0BB performance this year too (Billingsley's last start 9K 0BB).

With only 8 keepers it is highly doubtful that any more than one of:
Matthews
Billingsley
Bailey

and debatably zero, while Vernon and Daisuke would probably both be kept.

To think that Homer Bailey bridges the gap between Wells/Daisuke and Matthews/Billingsley is absolutely absurd. He has no value in a redraft and debatably still no value in an 8 team keeper.

Even if you are going to say that Matthews is equal to Wells, which I guess is fine (his numbers are slightly better thus far) then the trade boils down to Bailey/Billingsley for Matsuzaka, which is a pretty heinous deal considering that Bailey shouldn't be owned now, and Billingsley probably wasn't owned last week.

[Lofunzo]

As explained by the OP, I don't see how this is vetoable in the least. They both explained their intentions and are doing a trade that is right along those lines. I also don't see how keeping "only 8" is a small number. That's quite a bit.

[CBMGreatOne]

As explained by the OP, I don't see how this is vetoable in the least. They both explained their intentions and are doing a trade that is right along those lines. I also don't see how keeping "only 8" is a small number. That's quite a bit.

12 team league, 8 keepers means only 96 total players will be kept. Do you really think that Bailey or Billingsley will be in that mix? Only if theirs is a terrible team, which it will be if it trades off assets like Wells and Daisuke for marginally ownable players. Matthews is a decent player, but I just can't fathom this deal being close in value. It doesn't matter that much though as A. I'm not in your league and B. I would only be one vote if I was. I'd abide by the league vote whatever it ended up being (it appears to be in favor of a veto from what I can garner from reading the post).

[Lofunzo]

As explained by the OP, I don't see how this is vetoable in the least. They both explained their intentions and are doing a trade that is right along those lines. I also don't see how keeping "only 8" is a small number. That's quite a bit.

12 team league, 8 keepers means only 96 total players will be kept. Do you really think that Bailey or Billingsley will be in that mix? Only if theirs is a terrible team, which it will be if it trades off assets like Wells and Daisuke for marginally ownable players. Matthews is a decent player, but I just can't fathom this deal being close in value. It doesn't matter that much though as A. I'm not in your league and B. I would only be one vote if I was. I'd abide by the league vote whatever it ended up being (it appears to be in favor of a veto from what I can garner from reading the post).

I try to be completely objective when evaluating trades. In a keeper league, that is even more important. I never overvalue youth. Never. I always take proven talent over unproven kids and only use age when comparing 2 similar players. That said, I can't blame someone if they want to do the same. In reality, I would like to have more information, especially the entire roster of the team getting Bailey and Co. If he likes the upside of the 3 players and they would all be keepers for him, I think that it makes it better for him. If he would only keep 1 of them, I agree that it sucks. I respect the fact that he said that he wanted to rebuild and, if he can keep all 3 of them, he is certainly helping in that regard.