Looking for some advice on a vetoed trade

[CBMGreatOne]

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.

I'm not really sure that this is true. I think it is often true that in cases like this the contender (1st place team) cares a lot more about his team than the noncontender (last place team). If your leaguemates don't observe any palpable sacrifice from the contender whatsoever, they are going to lend extra credence to the possibility that the noncontender just doesn't care. That's what is happening here. They need to see a palpable sacrifice from the contender and they didn't, as I don't. I would chalk it up to "collusion via apathy" (no fault of Rails's of course) and move on with business as usual.

I think the above point gives too much credit to the idea that the vetoers are shooting the trade down out of jealousy, and I just don't see that as being the case here.

[Lofunzo]

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.

$.02

Then again, it's always a good idea to do league votes, though in this case it certainly would not have mattered.

I also hate having 1 person deciding which trades pass but there are 4 words that stand out to me and would force me to get explanations. Those words are "long standing keeper league". This is a league made up of people that know each other in some form. It is also a keeper league. Those 2 things would make me think differently as a commish.

[rails80]

I won't argue with anyone who says anything regarding the actual trade and how it would not have benefited the team in 2nd to last, but I wanted to see what kind of league I was in. I've been playing non-competitive fantasy baseball for a while and just in the past couple of years started playing in more competitive leagues. (2nd year in this one with these guys). With that said, I blew a gasket when I first saw the veto because there had been a public post earlier that day from a manager, which was subsequently removed, and then the trade was vetoed. It seemed odd. I just want the other owners to know that I didn't offer this trade, nor was there any collusion involved

[Born Slippy]

As commissioner in a keeper league I recently allowed Carpenter and Suzuki for Crawford and Hammels and Youkilis

this was as Carpenter was rehabbing fine

owner was sure Carpenter would come back and be fine

now as a player I told the guy getting CC, and everyone else, that I felt this was a dumb move in a keeper league especially with Carp's risk but just because I was proven right doesnt make me right in my opinion at the time