It may have been a strange offer, but this owner sent me an offer over the weekend. The deal involved me sending away a Cy Young winner. I jumped on it, and you'll see why when I post it. However, the league vetoed the deal, without asking either of us what our thoughts were behind the trade (as far as I know). I've never had a trade vetoed, so I don't know if there is some type of "unspoken" rule to vetoing? Should the owners involved be contacted prior to the vote, or should you just veto it if you want. One of the other owners posted a note this morning about the trade and how to veto, but then he pulled it off the public board, which makes me think he didn't mean to post it for everyone to see. To his defense, he did say that he would never think about vetoing a deal that seemed balanced, but he couldn't see the balance - which is why maybe he should have asked. I'll give the details of the league, as well as the standings/pts, rosters, etc.
The deal would have been: I give: Carpenter/Howry I get: Hamels/F Rodriguez
I'm in 1st place, he is in 11th place. My second year in the league, his first - so it's not like we know each other or have done this before...
12 team 5x5 roto (no bench spots) My Team C - VMart, Johjima 1B - Pena 2B - Young 3B - Cabrera SS - Theriot CI - Sheffield MI - Kendrick OF - Rios, Willingham, Victorino, Willits, Francoeur Util - Hafner
His Team C - Olivo, Hernandez 1B - Delgado 2B - Polanco 3B - Blake SS - Cabrera CI - Garciaparra MI - Durham OF - Ramirez, Guerrero, Granderson, Taguchi, Stairs Util - Kotchman
SP - Gaudin, Hamels, R Johnson (DL), Colon, Sheets, Mitre, Marcum, Sampson RP - F Rodriguez, Rivera, Street (DL), Gordon (DL)
He's obviously got 2 closers coming off the DL in Street and Gordon. We only have 2 DL spots in our league. In order to take both of them off the DL, he'd have to either drop 2 or pick up another guy on the DL. I assume he'd drop Mitre or Sampson and stash Carpenter, making his staff look like this:
SP - Gaudin, Sheets, Colon, Marcum, Mitre/Sampson, Johnson (DL), Carpenter (DL) RP - Rivera, Street, Gordon, Howry
Then when Carpenter comes off the DL, he can drop Howry or the other SP he had and his rotation would be:
SP - Carpenter, Gaudin, Sheets, Colon, Marcum RP - Rivera, Street, Gordon, Howry Then Johnson comes back and he drops Howry: SP - Carp, Gaudin, Sheets, Colon, Johnson, Marcum RP - Rivera, Street, Gordon
So let's see here, a NL Cy Young candidate and a consensus top 3 closer (for three years running) for a guy who has pitched 6 innings this season and is coming off a serious injury and an injury-replacement closer who might even lose his job to someone other than the incumbent.
No matter how you spin it, I have only one piece of advice for you:
rails80 wrote:To be honest, I did expect the veto. But its more so that they didn't ask how the trade came to be. I guess I am just not a fan of vetoes to begin with. HE offered me the trade, you know? Oh well.
I know, and I sympathize, but there is a point at which a trade "jumps the shark" and this is one of those trades. I would veto first and ask questions later myself as well, just one of those things.
Thanks for the replies. I guess this is all why I never want to be the commish of my league.
Anyway, I have since spoken with the commissioner and he said the league all e-mailed him directly, and he also e-mailed and tried to call the owner of this team who proposed the trade and did not get a response. Due to the 2-day turnaround to veto a deal, they had to make a quick decision and this was it. See...that I can accept.
Honestly, I didn't even accept the trade immediately. I sat there stunned and wondered if I was still asleep...but you can't fault me for clicking "ACCEPT"
BTOWNHESS wrote:I dislike 99% of vetos and why they are used which is why as the Commisioner of my long standing keeper league I have full veto power and havent used it ever.
BUT. If this trade came across my league and the 1st place team was about to load up with K-Rod and Hamels for Carpenter and Howry I would have vetoed it and not asked or cared why they did the trade.
And that is why you might not be qualified to have sole veto power in a league. Is asking why that much of a problem?? You have to be objective in that situation.
Respectfully disagree. This one is just too bad to merit a need for an explanation or a consensus. I certainly wouldn't question the extent to which someone is qualified to have sole discretion over vetoing because of a quick executive decision on this trade. I'd put the onus on the traders to ask for an explanation for a veto rather than on myself (the commish) to ask for an explanation for the trade.
Then again, it's always a good idea to do league votes, though in this case it certainly would not have mattered.
If you thought the trade would be vetoed why are you expecting the league to post why they vetoed it? Any time a first place team trades with the last place team regardless of who proposed it the rest of the league is going to be move to veto it unless it clearly benefits the last place team. Sorry but that is just reality fair or not. In your case this trade clearly benefited you and showed no benefit to the other team that I can see.